Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/December 2012

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 21:09, 28 December 2012 [1].

---

List of Birmingham City F.C. players (fewer than 25 appearances)

Nominator(s): Struway2 (talk) 13:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria. It's been some time since I've nominated anything here, so if conventions have changed, please be gentle with me. All constructive criticism welcome... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 14:08, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments I know there's a template, but I'd much prefer we avoided "#" links in hatnotes. Our readers may not get that at all. Can you just write it out and pipelink it? Removed entirely: it makes sense having that hatnote for the List of ... players, which a reader might visit when looking for the current squad, but not on this one. Often as not, I've seen the (second right) etc in image captions shown in italics. Not sure what our policy is in this respect, perhaps worth a quick check. MOS:CAPTION bullet point 3 says "The text of captions should not be specially formatted (with italics, for example), except in ways that would apply if it occurred in the main text." MOS:ITALICS doesn't seem to address the matter. Remarkable how our MAIN PAGE (!!!) strives to avoid compliance with the MOS. How odd.... No issues here then. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC) "When nationally organised league football began, the club, by then called simply Small Heath F.C., became a founder member of the Football Alliance, formed in 1889, the year after the Football League." comma check... five in this sentence. Perhaps too many run-on clauses? Reworded "More than 500 men have played ..." typically reinforce the subject on the start of a new lead para, so maybe "More than 500 Birmingham City F.C. players..."? (not great, but you get my gist?) Reworded " Billy Slater scored Small Heath Alliance's first FA Cup goal in the 4–1 FA Cup defeat of Derby Town in October 1881.[2]" so?! You don't mention that he's one of the sub-25 gang, although it could be inferred I suppose. I'd argue it should be inferred, seeing as this is the introductory section to a list of <25s. But I've dropped him: the James brothers illustrate the lack of national football at that time well enough without him. "Others left to seek opportunities with other teams. " again, not reiterating the subject (although I concede we wouldn't want to become uber-dull) but I do take issue with the repeat of "other" here. Reworded "who played one FA Cup-tie" (a) "in" one? and (b) does FA Cup tie need a hyphen? I'm not sure at-all.... Not sure "in" is necessary, but added anyway. And probably not. "Some players' careers were cut short by the two World Wars." then one example only. Maybe it's a case of "for example" here or something to bridge that gap. Reworded "For more information, see Association football positions and Formation (association football)." this would usually be a Note... I personally hate seeing "see also" comments in the main body of an article, even a key. Disagree. I personally hate making the reader click up and down an article to see a note that they may well be irritated to have clicked down to, found uninteresting, and then had to click back up again (or bugger off entirely). When I was helping with the Arsenal F.C. FAR, the judicious use of (see articlename) was suggested by Tony1 as a means of reducing overlinking in the prose (endless blue football seasons). So at the first mention of a season in the history section, it was unlinked and (see Seasons in English football) added, with the intention of telling the reader how to get to a season if they wanted to. And it's still there after nearly three years... Though I've converted them to wikilink items in the first sentence anyway. "Players marked * were registered for the club as at the date specified below." below? I think you specified the date above... It was below before I rearranged the key. Pause: I now have to attend a militant residents' meeting. I may be some time. My apologies.... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Continuing "Where a player was never " some of these players are current so this tense is a little odd. Hamer is Hameur in our own article, which is correct? An interesting question. The article was moved from Hameur to Hamer when he joined Millwall, but has now been moved back. English common spelling I'd guess to be Hameur, which is what the FA use, though his FIFA page has Hamer. I'll change it back "Tresor Luntala" has a missing diacritic. Could you pipelink Utility player to the associatoin football section (although, in all honesty, the section is pretty weak...!) Sid Moffatt - our article has him as Moffat... which is right? Another interesting question: see Talk:Sid Moffat. One "t", for the sake of argument :-) The Rambling Man (talk) 10:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks for parts 1 and 2 of your review: presume there's still more to come. Will go and deal Have now dealt with matters arising from the second batch of comments. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:50, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Last orders please "loan spell" we all know what that means, is it International Englishishish? Don't know: should we wait and see if non-BritEng speakers question it? You have five lovely images down the side of the table, I suspect you could add another 25 without unnecessarily elongated the list. How about it? I'll see what there is about, but free images older than very recent, newer than 100 years old, and depicting someone whose caption might read something more interesting than Fred Bloggs played three times for Birmingham in the 1920s, aren't that easy to come by. And a stack of players photographed in the last five years might be a touch recentist. Many lists like this I've seen initially in alphabetical order. You have it in descending appearance order followed by surname I think. Possibly worth just a quick note.... ...like the one in the Key, bullet point 1? The main list is split into three parts by number of appearances, so logically the parts should be ordered by the same criterion. There was a small discussion on the subject here. Now then, a nasty thing, per WP:YEAR, we don't often repeat the century in a year range if it's the same. How do you feel about that? Uncomfortable, to be honest. The problem arises from using what looks like a year range to indicate years of first and last appearance. There's no logical argument for year of last appearance being less legible than year of first appearance, and without the century it would be. The alternative would be to have two columns, one for first app and one for last, but that'd get very messy with the many single-appearance players and people with more than one spell at the club. I think I'd invoke the word "normally", as in "A closing CE or AD year is normally written with two digits", to suggest this should be an exception to the norm. That is all. Sorry for the disjointed review... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks again. Hope your residents' meeting went well. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks, it didn't, but hey ho. As usual, your diligence has pretty much superseded most of my comments, mainly due to my incompetence in reviewing. I'll recheck over the weekend (sounds patronising, but sorry...) and cap it all off. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support glad to see a decent contributor continuing to make FLs better every time. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

• Comment: Shouldn't the title of this be List of Birmingham City F.C. players with fewer than 25 appearances? pbp 17:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • No. It's the third part of List of Birmingham City F.C. players, split on grounds of size into players with 100+ apps (which retains the basic name as permitted at WP:NCLL#Basic naming third para), those with 25–99 apps (List of Birmingham City F.C. players (25–99 appearances)) and those with 1–24. Previous featured examples using this convention are the Manchester United and Liverpool player lists at WP:FL#British club football, and many more in Category:Lists of association football players by club. The relevant naming convention, at WP:NCLL#Long (split) list naming recommendations, prefers the form List of FOO: 25–99 appearances, but accepts the parenthesised version.

    What might well be a better question, although it would probably need to be discussed in a wider forum than this, is: for accuracy, clarity and consistency, shouldn't the title be List of Birmingham City F.C. players (1–24 appearances). cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Comment –

• The photo caption refers to Jack Lee, but the name of his article here is John Lee, and I don't see a reference to a nickname there. Is this all correct?
  • There is now... The article was written using info from a 1995 book, which called him John, but in the 2010 edition, he's Jack. Presume the more recent work ought to be more accurate. Will think about moving the article, but haven't got time today. Thanks for noticing.
• The two website links in the general references need access dates, just like the websites used in cites.
  • Done.
• What makes ref 137 (Northern Ireland's Footballing Greats) a reliable source? Looks like a blog to me. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Please see WP:RS/N archive.

Thanks for your comments. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 19:24, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments

• Any reason why Fred and Tommy James don't have articles or are not red-linked?
  • The same reason as the other very early players: appearing in the FA Cup isn't one of the criteria for a presumption of notability as per WP:NFOOTBALL, and insufficient media coverage to pass the general notability guideline. Arthur James is different in that he was a top player at the time, regularly playing for the Birmingham FA XI in inter-association representative matches, which were basically one step down from senior international, and enough media coverage exists to write a better article than he's got at the moment.
• refs should come after punctuation, currently ref 6 does not NapHit (talk) 09:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
  • MoS says that "The ref tags should immediately follow the text to which the footnote applies, including any punctuation". But there isn't any punctuation, so it just immediately follows the text. Please see the first example at MOS:REFPUNC.

Thanks for your comments. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support my queries have been dealt and I feel the list meets the criteria. NapHit (talk) 02:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Mattythewhite (talk) 17:34, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments The wikilink for first team leads to Glossary of association football terms#F, although this does not provide a definition for first team. I'm pretty sure it used to but it seems to have been removed. There was an article first team, which was apparently "merge"/redirected to the glossary section some time ago. And there was indeed a definition at that time, but it was the one that now attaches more accurately to "first eleven". I've added "first team" to the glossary. Are there appropriate wikilinks for the German and French Olympic teams? Added: there is a specific German one, but at this time the French counted their Olympic matches as full internationals. Didn't think France national football team was particularly helpful, so linked to France at the 1920 Summer Olympics#Football, as Pentland was the coach at those games. Do you think it'd be worth mentioning who Finnan played for at the 2002 World Cup? Wouldn't do any harm "Club career is defined as the first and last calendar years in which the player appeared for the club in any of the competitions listed above." - don't you mean below? Above, below... As per the reply to TRM (capped, above) it was correct before the key got rearranged A few players appear to be incorrectly ordered; shouldn't Jack Thorogood be listed above Alberto Tarantini, Paul Tomlinson be listed above Nicky Hunt and Harry Haddon be listed above Joe Smith? Indeed, thanks for noticing. Butland's out of place as well, but he'll move anyway when I update for yesterday's game. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 03:13, 22 December 2012 (UTC) Thanks for your comments. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:18, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support. As usual, good work. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:34, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 21:09, 28 December 2012 [2].

---

List of songs recorded by Katy Perry

Nominator(s): AARON• ^TALK 15:18, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... I believe it meets the FL criteria. I have permission to have concurrent FLC's as my other one has 9 supports. AARON• ^TALK 15:18, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose: Here's why:

1. Lead is a little too long

   Lead is fine. Not too long. AARON• ^TALK 12:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

2. Most of the "sources" appear to be liner notes or iTunes. I'd appreciate something more reliable pbp 20:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

   You can't get any more reliable than the album booklet for the writers, so that's fine. iTunes is also fine for a release date, so that's fine too. AARON• ^TALK 12:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

• To the above, to echo with Aaron said, the lead is not too long, and the album booklet is where the information of the writers come from. You can't get any better than that. Statυs (talk) 16:21, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Statυs (talk) 00:36, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments from Status: As someone familiar with Katy's career, Singer-songwriter isn't what she is. She may write her songs, but generally, a singer-songwriter also produces, composes, etc., like, for example, Taylor Swift. Done. AARON• TALK 20:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC) "as well as several collaborations" is sort of vague. How about something like "as well as collaborations for other artist's albums"? Had a problem with that phrasing on one of my other FLCs. AARON• TALK 20:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC) "the age of" Seems a bit redundant to me, "At 15" gives the reader all they need. Done. AARON• TALK 20:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC) record contract → recording contract (and wikilink, I'm not sure it's that familiar of a term.) Linked. AARON• TALK 20:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC) "and began to record" → "and recorded" Done. AARON• TALK 20:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC) Statυs (talk) 16:21, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Statυs (talk) 00:36, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks. AARON• ^TALK 11:42, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Tomíca(T2ME) 18:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

:Leaning to support, however, here are some brief comments: Stargate ---> should be StarGate, I know you are aware of this, because most of the sources list them as StarGate They aren't credited in the booklet as such though. Even in reviews it's a lower case 'g'. AARON• TALK The new material included "Dressin' Up" and the single releases "Part of Me" and "Wide Awake". ---> Maybe to add who the writters of the songs are? Sentence would be very long then. They are only re-release tracks. AARON• TALK Also this is optional, but don't you think more pictures of writters and features can be added in the songs section? Yeah. AARON• TALK Billboard reference 1 should be {{cite web}} per consistency Done. AARON• TALK Link FMQB in reference 8 AARON• TALK That's all, all in all a descent job on the list. — Tomíca(T2ME) 20:45, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 18:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks. AARON• ^TALK 22:22, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 21:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments – good work with songographies as usual. Trim: The first paragraph of the lead slightly pushes the boundaries of relevance because it does not really discuss the songs. I suggest replacing it with a more concise and brief version. Grammar: "... recorded a gospel album entitled Katy Hudson in 2000 and 2001, however the record company closed down soon after." – "however" should be substituted for "but". Grammar: "Two years later, the singer signed a contract with Island Def Jam and begun to record another album" Conciseness: "which also ceased to come to fruition" can be shortened to "which was never finished" or "which was never released". Diction: "but it was soon terminated after record executives decided that the singer's creative vision was not compatible with what they had envisaged" – an odd word to use; there has got to be something nicer. Perhaps "cancelled" if that is what you mean. Redundancy: "Once signed with Capitol, Perry began recording sessions for her second studio album entitled One of the Boys" Clarify: "She collaborated with Dr. Luke and Max Martin on the lead and second singles 'I Kissed a Girl' and 'Hot n Cold', respectively." – how can there be two "second singles"? There aren't two second singles, that's not what I'm saying. The lead single is IKAG and the second HnC. Have reworded. AARON• TALK 13:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC) Redundancy and wording: "Perry co-wrote the songs 'Lost" and 'A Cup of Coffee' with Ted Bruner, while she shared writing credits with Greg Wells on the tracks 'Ur So Gay' and 'Fingerprints'." – the use of "while" is awkward here too. No need for "she" in "and she shared". —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 14:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC) Repetition: The repetition of "Perry" gets a bit tiresome, more so in the third paragraph. Punctuation: Missing period after "Perry collaborated with Monte Neuble and Christopher 'Tricky' Stewart on 'Circle the Drain' and 'Who Am I Living For?'". Diction: "On March 23, 2012, Perry re-released Teenage Dream entitled Teenage Dream: The Complete Confection" – should be "as". Grammar: "which included new songs as well as remixes of songs from the standard version of the album released in 2010." – "included" should be simple present. Grammar: The same goes for this sentence: "The new material included 'Dressin' Up' and the single releases 'Part of Me' and 'Wide Awake'." Repetition: To avoid repeated statement of the fact that the re-release included new songs, I would probably cut "new songs" in the second-last sentence and in the last sentence say "It features new songs, such as...". Just cut "new songs as well as". This is told in the following sentence. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] Table of contents: the link to "A" is not needed as it serves no purpose. Sorting: "The One That Got Away" should be sorted as "One That Got Away, The". You missed this one. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 14:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC) No I didn't. AARON• TALK 14:46, 16 December 2012 (UTC) Woops, OK. Remember to move the song and its acoustic version to the "O"s and not the "T"s. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 14:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC) Hmm no that's not how it works. The start of the title is "The", but it sorts under "O". AARON• TALK 17:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC) Footnotes: Note 1 is not needed because the "Album" column gives this information already. Sources: If possible, avoid a heavy reliance on primary sources and retailers. They do not have to be completely eliminated, but somethird-party articles to establish some notability would be good. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 20:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC) Done all. AARON• TALK 13:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC) Revisited. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 14:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC) Done all. AARON• TALK 17:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Support – I'm happy with the fixes. Great work. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 21:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks. AARON• ^TALK 21:55, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Note once you're done with Penguin's comments, let me know, I'll review and I promise that once my comments are dealt with, I'll support. This is a decent list already. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:28, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 18:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Comments "for three studio albums as well as several collaborations" perhaps "many of which were collaborated with others" or something "2001, however" replace comma with semi-colon TBrandley 05:17, 17 December 2012 (UTC) Done. Thanks. AARON• TALK 17:36, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support Great work Aaron. TBrandley 18:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks. AARON• ^TALK 18:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support – Article looks fine and organised. It deserves the gold star! — Oz 20:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks. AARON• ^TALK 00:27, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

• Note - It is unlikely that I will be able to respond to anything from the 23 December 2012 to 6 January 2013. AARON• ^TALK 18:10, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:04, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments – Excess period after "E.T." needs removal. Same goes for the period after "Who Am I Living For?" In each case the punctuation from the title should double as the punctuation needed at the end of a sentence. I took to addressing these two points, after having read a bit more into the punctuation rules. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 10:41, 20 December 2012 (UTC) In the photo's alt text, "A" shouldn't be capitalized, and I've never heard of a "Caucasin" before. In a couple of captions, I see the formulation "and also appears...". In these situations, the "also" is a redundancy that doesn't do anything for the sentence. All it does is add a word. This is a helpful tip for preparing articles for FAC, not just FLC. See also should come before Notes. Publisher of ref 8 (FMQB) should be italicized as a print publication. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:23, 20 December 2012 (UTC) Done all. Thanks Penguin also. AARON• TALK 21:45, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support: It's well written, nicely edited and have good reliable sources. Thumbs Up.Pks1142 (talk) 10:32, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
• Support: Concur with statement above. —AdabowtheSecond 04:58, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks Pks1142 and Adabow AARON• ^TALK 21:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 21:09, 28 December 2012 [3].

---

List of Major League Baseball hitters with two grand slams in one game

Nominator(s): Bloom6132 (talk) and ChrisTheDude (talk) 00:03, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it has been improved significantly over the past few months and now meets all 6 FL criteria. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:03, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 04:16, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Oppose Unlink "baseball" per WP:OVERLINK Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC) "all three bases are occupied by baserunners", take a look at WP:EASTEREGG Not sure what you mean here. Nevertheless, I delinked the huge "all three bases are occupied by baserunners" and linked only "bases loaded". Is that OK? —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:52, 15 November 2012 (UTC) That's pretty much what meant, it's fine now. TBrandley 04:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Avoid bold links per WP:CONTEXTLINK Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC) No, please don't "unlink" it, just remove the bold, the link is very important per WP:UNDERLINK. TBrandley 04:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:12, 16 November 2012 (UTC) If possible, references should be after punctuation per WP:REFPUNCT Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:34, 15 November 2012 (UTC) "is the only player" repeatedly used one after another in lede Fixed. Added "sole player" in between. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Second paragraph seems a big huge, would suggest splitting into even more paragraphs for WP:ACCESS Split into 2 separate paragraphs. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Add table caption to the key table to provide table reasoning per WP:DTT Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC) It's mostly good, but WP:DTT states "Table captions consisting of one single word like "actor", "film" or "television" are inadequate as they are not descriptive enough." That said, "players" should not be used in this list, would suggest a much firmer caption, such as "Major League Baseball hitters with two grand slams in one game", something like that. TBrandley 04:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Fixed. Replaced with "MLB hitters with two grand slams in one game". —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Same goes for the players table, for WP:DTT Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Add plainrowheaders to key table for MOS:BOLD The column headers are bold; I think the key should reflect that. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2012 (UTC) "Refs" → "Ref(s)" I utilized "Refs" because in this case, all rows in this table have more than one ref (minimum two if not three). Therefore, the plural form applies to every row. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Great, but please add period dot "." to the end, forgot the add that. Thanks, TBrandley 04:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:12, 16 November 2012 (UTC) "Baseball-Almanac.com. Baseball Almanac" remove work parameter, repetitive Again, recent precedent (i.e. less than a month) utilizes both. And no, I can't find anything else that exists that suggests the contrary. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:40, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Ref. 1's publisher should be "BBC" and work should be "BBC News" Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC) The publisher for "ESPN" should be "ESPN Inc" I think it's been established by the most recent baseball FLs (i.e. Dick Howser Trophy, Branch Rickey Award) that the publisher is "ESPN Internet Ventures". —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Nope, that will not do it. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. TBrandley 18:33, 15 November 2012 (UTC) It's not a matter of whether a format will do or not. It's the fact that there's nothing else that exists that suggests the contrary to the current formatting. It's been established throughout the WikiProject and that's something I cannot change unilaterally. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:27, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Fine then, but not keen on it. TBrandley 04:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Fixed. I think I can be a bit flexible here, since it's only one ESPN source that's being altered. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Avoid doubled periods in references, as seen in ref. 10 Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Any external links? That would have been Baseball Almanac, but that's already being used as a general Reference. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC) "In attaining the milestone" check your grammar there Fixed. Changed to "Tatís became the only player to hit two grand slams in the same inning when he attained the milestone." Is that better wording, or does it still sound a bit iffy? —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC) I would split the two tables in the players section into two sections, one being named "Key", and the other being named simply "Players", seems right I'm sorry, but I don't really understand. Do you want two "level 2" section headings instead of the table captions? Because the more recent baseball-related lists do away with having two separate sections for key and players. In the history (see very bottom) of the recently promoted Golden Spikes Award FL, an active fellow member WP Baseball corrected me on the issue and said the "key does not need its own section." —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC) The article's use of alt text wasn't added correctly, instead of stating the player's name, like "Fernando Tatis", instead say a "man" per MOS:IMAGES, as it should not repeat the caption in itself. The rest of the alt text seems fine. Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 17:07, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 02:34, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
• Comment I think it would be better if you had a photo of Fernando Tatis in a Cardinals uniform since he hit his grand slams with them (same for the other players). After a quick search on the Commons and Flickr I couldn't find any such photos, but at least the current photo is decent quality. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I searched Flickr as well and unfortunately, the only available pics of Tatis are semi-free and all depict him in a Mets uniform. —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:46, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Question is this collection of people notable outside the Baseball Almanac? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it is notable. MLB.com lists this collection in their "Rare Feats" section, along with Ref 3 (David Vincent's book). —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:02, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments –

• "Furthermore, Fernando Tatis is the only player to hit two grand slams in the same inning." I don't see why we would say "Furthermore" when the Lazzeri fact bears little resemblance to this one.

• Fixed. Changed to "In attaining the milestone." —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

• Runs batted in should probably be linked in the lead, as a term of jargon that could use a link.

• It's already linked earlier in the second sentence of the 2nd paragraph ("Lazzeri...proceeded to hit a third home run in the game and finished with a total of eleven runs batted in.") —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

• All images could use alt text.

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:38, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Giants2008 (Talk) 22:22, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments picky, from an outsider view of baseball... "while Jim Northrup hit his grand slams on consecutive pitches.[9]" but I assume these were consecutively received pitches, not consecutively thrown pitches, right? And from what you've said before, in different innings? I know I'm being difficult but could use clarification. Done. Changed to "hit his grand slams on consecutive pitches received in the fifth and sixth innings." —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC) You have a general ref section, move [11] there too. Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC) I believe I've asked about this before in MLB lists, but when sorting scorelines, I would normally expect scores where the winning number of runs is tied to then sort by the fewest number of runs conceded. Perhaps that's not standard in baseball lists? It certainly is in association football lists. Quoting fellow WP Baseball member Rlendog in the ongoing List of Cleveland Indians Opening Day starting pitchers FLC, he states that "[t]he other similar FLs are all sorted on score rather than margin, so that seems to be the consensus as to how to sort this column." He goes on to say that "sorting on margin could be confusing, since the margin of victory is not explicitly shown - I doubt that readers who sort on this column would generally expect to see a sort based on margin." After searching several examples and reading this statement, I think it's safe to say that sorting by margin is not standard in baseball lists. —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:05, 28 November 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:10, 27 November 2012 (UTC) TBF, TRM didn't actually say the list should sort by margin, he said that the list should sort by score, and then where two scores are the same (i.e. the three scores of 12, the two of 13 and the four of 14) then margin should be the secondary sort. I tried to implement this but couldn't figure out how to do it..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Fair enough. The issue of secondary sorting was also brought up in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/30–30 club/archive1 back in August. I couldn't find a way to do it back then, and still don't know how to. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC) We do use tricks on cricket lists to achieve automatic secondary sorting when, for instance, sorting by most number of wickets, the best for those tied is to have fewest runs, so the secondary sort is on that. Have a look at one of the recent "five-wicket haul" lists which use the {{sort}} template to achieve this. Having said that, of course I concede to consensus so if I'm the only one who thinks the random secondary sorting is odd, then you don't need to do anything about it. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

;Comments by Crisco 1492 Image copyright status looks fine (no action needed) How Tatís achieved his record seems a bit fluffy (don't really need the pitcher, for example, and "the first pitcher in over a hundred years to surrender two grand slams in a single inning" sounds like purple prose to me) Removed any prose about the pitcher. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC) That was just an example. You go into a lot more detail for his effort than anyone else's. How much is WP:UNDUE? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2012 (UTC) Removed more additional undue details, keeping only the important facts. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC) Every team which had a player hit two grand slams won their milestone games. - Would probably do better above, before you get into detail about the individual cases Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC) Wikilink home (Home (sports), I think) Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC) I gave a copyedit, be sure to double check. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 11 December 2012 (UTC) Thank you for your feedback Crisco. Much appreciated. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support on prose and images. Looks nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:20, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support - with comments: St Louis Cardinals in lead should be St. Louis Cardinals. The links to bases loaded and runs batted in are redirects, as is National Baseball Hall of Fame in ref 12, but that's a quibble. Also, consider archiving your references, so that changes or removals of websites don't destroy your citations. --PresN 05:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

• Done. Fixed St. Louis Cardinals and tweaked all redirects to piped links of the full title. I haven't done archiving before, but I think BaseballReference.com is pretty stable (if it does turn dead, then almost every baseball-related FL is screwed). —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 21:09, 28 December 2012 [4].

---

Matchbox Twenty discography

Nominator(s): Holiday56 (talk) 09:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because having done much work on the article, I feel it may be ready to be promoted to featured list status. Holiday56 (talk) 09:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 15:13, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments "The discography of American rock band" missing "the" "The" isn't actually needed. Here's an example of a featured list that doesn't use it. Holiday56 (talk) 09:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC) For consistency, remove the hypten on "number-one", and its not needed anyway Since "number-one" is used as a compound modifier in the sentence, the hyphen is needed (MOS:HYPHEN). Holiday56 (talk) 09:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 01:25, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 15:13, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

*I gave a copyedit and don't have any prose comments. However, I noticed a couple things The lede completely ignores the extended plays and music videos. Did they have any videos which are worthy of note? Chrisye, for example, had one which was the first Indonesian song to be shown on MTV Southeast Asia and one which raised controversy for its costume choices. Added mentions of the extended plays. The band doesn't have any particularly noteworthy videos. Holiday56 (talk) 08:59, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Hmm... now this is contrasting with the five-year hiatus. 2004 + 5=2009, not 2007. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Fixed. Holiday56 (talk) 09:52, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Perhaps just avoid stating the (number)-year at all? I.e. "after a hiatus" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Okay. Done. Holiday56 (talk) 11:52, 12 November 2012 (UTC) I strongly suggest archiving these pages you've used as a reference. You never know when websites will move pages or become unavailable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:54, 11 November 2012 (UTC) The sites used as references (Billboard, AllMusic) are very much active, and have been used by a vast majority of the music-related articles on the site; I personally can't see these pages disappearing any time soon. I may go through an archival process in the future, but I personally don't think it's particularly necessary as of now. Holiday56 (talk) 08:59, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support on prose and images. Looks solid. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Source comment – Can we get a page number for the book used as part of reference 3? That would make it more verifiable than it is now. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
  • No page number information available, apparently. The book doesn't appear to be numbered, as seen in this preview of the book. Holiday56 (talk) 11:12, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:04, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments "such as" followed by "such as" in quick succession. Done. Holiday56 (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Link "certified" appropriately. Done. Holiday56 (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC) "the band released their second" -> new para so "Matchbox Twenty released..." Done. Holiday56 (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC) "[8][6][3][4] " would prefer these in numerical order. Done. Holiday56 (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Never keen on CS being an abbreviation for just "Cassette"... Done. Holiday56 (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC) I can't see any video charts on the Billboard page. The video albums are sourced in reference 9. Holiday56 (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Since Overjoyed charted, shouldn't it have an article? Done. Holiday56 (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Similarly for other charted works. Redlinked several charted releases. Holiday56 (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 08:51, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 16:53, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments – overall a well done discography. Dangling modifier: "As it was not released for commercial sale, American chart provider Billboard deemed "Push" ineligible to appear on its main Hot 100 singles chart." Should be written with "Push" directly after the comma, so like "As it was not released for commercial sale, "Push" was deemed ineligible by American chart provider Billboard to appear on its main Hot 100 singles chart." Done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Hyphenate: "top ten hit" – add a hyphen in "top ten" because it is a compound adjective. Done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Hyphenate: Same with "twelve times" here: "...and was certified twelve times platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)." Done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) POV: "Mad Season spawned three more singles, two of which were moderately successful..." – how do you define "moderately successful"? Removed. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Redundancy: "More Than You Think You Are, the band's third studio album, was released in November 2002 and it peaked at number six on the Billboard 200" Done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Unsupported by citation: "...and was a major factor in More Than You Think You Are's long-lasting chart presence." Removed. Holiday56 (talk) 12:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC) "The extended play EP was released in November 2003, peaking at number 43 on the Billboard 200; the video album Show: A Night in the Life of Matchbox Twenty was released in May 2004, topping the Billboard Top Video Albums chart." – these two do not seem to be related, so the semi-colon is weak here. Done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Needs citation: "Following a hiatus to allow lead singer Rob Thomas to focus on his solo career, Matchbox Twenty reunited to record six new songs for a compilation album." Done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Redundancy and hyphenate: "...it also became a top ten hit in Australia and Canada." – remove "also" and hyphenate "top ten". Done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Hyphenate: "became a top 40 hit in Australia." – hyphenate "top 40". Done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Per WP:NUMERAL, comparable quantities should be written consistently as figures or should be spelled out. In other words, all chart tiers should be consistently formatted (top ten vs. top 40) and all chart positions should be consistently formatted (number one vs. number 40). In the past I've been told to spell out numbers from one to ten and leave all other numbers in numeral form. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Yes, that's the rule of thumb, which I've folowed too. However, this is one of a few exceptions to that rule. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 13:11, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Okay. Done. Holiday56 (talk) 15:49, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Even if it isn't used as a source, an external link to Discogs is a bit concerning due to its quality and wiki-like workings. There's a fine line between external link and source, as discussed in the deletion review for the template. Similar to IMDB links appearing in film articles, Discogs links can appear on discography articles. Holiday56 (talk) 12:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC) —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 11:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Support – this list now meets the criteria and is the result of a fine job. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 16:53, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 The Rambling Man 18:38, 27 December 2012 [5].

---

List of Dragon Quest media

Nominator(s): PresN 06:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey all, taking a break from all the genre fiction award lists to jump back to video games. This is the list of all Dragon Quest media, patterned after the List of Final Fantasy media FL I helped with and the List of Final Fantasy video games FL I wrote. As the second-most popular Square Enix franchise after Final Fantasy, I've wanted to do this for a while, but for "some reason" I didn't. Well, you all can now see why it took me so long: the list encompasses over 30 games on multiple systems each, five movies/anime series, dozens and dozens of books and manga series (generally spread over multiple volumes as is the norm in Japan) and over 90 albums of music - the vast majority of all of which have never been released outside of Japan. This is the only English-language comprehensive guide to all the nonsense released for this franchise over the last 26 years, and I hope it meets the standard! Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 06:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

*Comments from Crisco 1492 Per WP:ISBN we should use 13-digit numbers. This will help. Double check for places where you've used hyphens instead of dashes, I've seen at least one. The overviews of the games are all uncited (video board games, etc.). Not particularly keen on the non-free logo, as it is tiny and thus rather jarring as used. If there were an infobox or something, okay, but it looks weird when there are only three lines indented. Dragon Quest III Game Book: ISBN 4-900527-04-2 is returning a checksum error. Its first game premiered in Japan in 1986, and Dragon Quest games have subsequently been localized for markets in North America, Europe and Australia, on over a dozen video game consoles since its debut on the Nintendo Entertainment System. - I'd put NES near the bit about the first game (both are about the debut) Dragon Quest is Square Enix's second most successful franchise behind the Final Fantasy franchise, having sold over 58 million units worldwide to date. It has been cited as the most popular video game franchise in Japan. - You may want to qualify the first sentence with "internationally" then. In addition to traditional role-playing games, the series includes first-person adventure games, portable games, massively multiplayer online role-playing games, and games for mobile phones. - This is still related to media, perhaps have this near your description on over a dozen video game consoles? Nothing in the lede about how Dragon Quest media is almost all exclusively Japanese? That's it from me, fairly solid (as always) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC) Alright, think I've gotten it all. Thanks for the isbn converter link, helped a lot for converting those, though I regret putting them in the first place now. --PresN 21:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support on prose, looks solid. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 20:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments "and his studio, Armor Project, and" too many uses of "and", would suggest replacing the final "and" with "being" Fixed. Avoid bold links in the table per WP:ACCESS There is nothing in ACCESS about avoiding bold links in tables, or in DTT- rowheaders in tables even bold the first row by default, linked or no, and the title of the video game is the first row in the table. Tables don't meet WP:ACCESS or WP:DTT for scope rows and cols or table captions Urgh, I'll see if I can modify the templates to work. As to table captions, though, each table has at minimum its own section header and sometimes its own paragraph of description- a table caption would be superfluous. Alright, turns out I'm a wizard. Both {{Video game table}} (the games) and {{Video game titles}} (the books/movies) and their subtemplates, {{Video game table item}} and {{Video game titles/item}} have been updated to have row and column headers while retaining the same look in all their various varieties (VG titles has a whole section that's optional), except that VG titles now has a heading row, which it was lacking before. Does that work? --PresN 20:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Yep, thanks. TBrandley 20:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC) That's all I have. Very good work! TBrandley 17:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Replied inline. --PresN 19:09, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support on all criteria, looks great. Well done! TBrandley 20:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:22, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments "Its first game premiered..." I would say "The first game of the series premiered...." Done. "It has been cited as the most" by whom? And what does "most popular" mean in this context? Most sales? Best in a survey? Cited the (now 3) sources, though none of them define what they mean so I changed to direct quotes. No need to capitalise mobile phone in the tables. Done. Not keen on the bold italic linked text. Just italic would suffice. Changed the template to unbold. For PlayStation, shouldn't you link to the specific console, e.g. PlayStation (console)? Yes, done. Complete sentences in the tables should end with a full stop. Added when needed, or changed to not be full sentences. If the releases are notable enough to be included in this table, why do some not have articles, or at least why aren't they redlinked here? "notable enough to be included in this table", in this case, means "exists" - I tried very hard to include every single piece of media ever created for the DQ series. As far as video games go, for the ones that aren't linked it's because they are wrapped up into a single series article (Itadaki Street, Dragon Quest: Monster Battle Road) or just haven't had an article made yet, for those two I've now redlinked. "Dragon Quest & Final Fantasy in Itadaki Street Special" for consistency you need to relink the PS2 here. Done. Arcade game doesn't need a capital A. Done. No reason for Books and manga section to have larger font. Agreed, changed the template (that one's used more widely than the one I used for video games, so we'll see if it sticks.) For year range format, see WP:YEAR. Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:39, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Replied inline. --PresN 00:01, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments –

• I don't see how a non-free logo image can be justified for this list as opposed to the main article, where it has a better case. Not having it certainly doesn't detract from readers' understanding, so it fails the non-free content criteria. There's no law saying an FL must have images, and none would be better than a faulty non-free one.
• Ref 19 should be after punctuation, not before, and "and" should be added after the comma here.
• All caps in refs 43 and 58 need fixing. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:27, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

• Removed, done, and done. --PresN 20:53, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support I think that the table needs a smile, but that's just me being excessively nit-picky. Thus, I drop my support here. Good work :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support I didn't notice anything that would detract it for FL. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 08:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 The Rambling Man 18:38, 27 December 2012 [6].

---

List of Cleveland Indians Opening Day starting pitchers

Nominator(s): Astros4477 (talk) 16:31, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... I feel it meets FLC and matches similar Featured Lists such as List of Chicago Cubs Opening Day starting pitchers and List of Baltimore Orioles Opening Day starting pitchers. Astros4477 (talk) 16:31, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 13:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments "The first game of the new baseball season for a team is played on Opening Day..." for a team is redundant  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 21:17, 31 October 2012 (UTC) This isn't entirely accurate. There's an opening day to the Major League Baseball season, but each team also has its own opening day, and they're not necessarily the same. - Eureka Lott 14:07, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Would it be more understandable if we said, "The first game of the new baseball season is played on the team's Opening Day?"--Astros4477 (talk) 17:29, 1 November 2012 (UTC) "since they began play as a Major League team in 1901" -> since they became a Major League team in 1901  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 21:19, 31 October 2012 (UTC) Avoid one sentence paragraphs, merge with it another  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 21:22, 31 October 2012 (UTC) "when Jairo Asencio gave up a 3-run home run in the top of the 16th inning to give the Blue Jays the win." I have no idea what that means, anyway you can make that understandable to someone who doesn't follow baseball? I have added two links so that if readers don't know what a home run and inning are, they can easily find the info.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:26, 31 October 2012 (UTC) Doesn't really help. What is a 3 run home run? I really understand how this led to the Blue jays winning. If I'm having an issue understanding this then other readers who are not familiar with baseball will have similar trouble. NapHit (talk) 22:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC) I think I have made it understandable.--Astros4477 (talk) 23:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC) I still don't understand it. I have no idea what gave up a 3run home run means and how this led to victory. I would just remove this bit altogether and state that the game lasted 16 innings, as I don't think the rest can be explained to a non-baseball fan succinctly. NapHit (talk) 13:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC) I fear you've managed to take a simple sentence and make it rather awkward. The home run is a basic part of the game, and it doesn't take a big fan to figure out how it works. - Eureka Lott 14:07, 1 November 2012 (UTC) I'm aware of what a home run is, its the sentence as a whole that makes no sense. I don't understand what a 3run home run means, 3 home runs in a row? Its not clear. What is gave up referring to? Why did the player give it up? To the layman its not clear. Its certainly a simple sentence if you understand baseball jargon, but for someone who doesn't its troublesome, hence why I mentioned it. NapHit (talk) 14:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC) If there are two runners on base when a batter hits a home run, it's a three-run home run. The hitter is credited with batting in three runs: one for himself, plus the two baserunners. - Eureka Lott 14:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Ok, so I'm going to assume by giving up a 3run home run, the batter mentioned in the sentence failed to achieve a 3run home run? NapHit (talk) 17:16, 1 November 2012 (UTC) No, in the sentence it says Jairo Asencio (who was the pitcher) gave up a three-run home run meaning that Jairo Asencio gave up a home run when two guys were on base. This batted in three runs, the two guys that were on base and the batter himself. We probably should of mentioned that Jairo Asencio was the pitcher.--Astros4477 (talk) 17:25, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Right, the length of this discussion should be an indication that the sentence is not adequate to readers who are not familiar to baseball, I would simply just say it was the longest game and they got beat. I don't think you can succinctly explain what all that means in the sentence. NapHit (talk) 19:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 19:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Remove the colouring in the column headers, there's no need for it and it obscures the sort keys  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 22:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC) Table currently does not meet MOS:DTT. Col and row scopes need to be added I added Col scopes but the align center got messed up when I added row scopes.--Astros4477 (talk) 22:30, 31 October 2012 (UTC) You should {{dagger}} instead of the normal dagger, as the normal one can not be deciphered by screen readers. Where's this used? I'm not familiar with it.--Astros4477 (talk) 22:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC) Where you use the unicode dagger (†), it should be replaced by the above template. See WP:NOSYMBOLS for more info. NapHit (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2012 (UTC)  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 23:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC) The unicode one is still used in the main table. NapHit (talk) 23:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC)  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 23:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC) The final score column should sort by margin of victory not in numerical order I'm not sure I agree with this. It sorts by the Indians score. Most, if not all of the articles sort by that teams score.--Astros4477 (talk) 22:20, 31 October 2012 (UTC) I would expect it to sort by margin not score, be interested to see what other reviewers think. NapHit (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2012 (UTC) Images could do with alt text  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 22:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC) You use different date formats in the references be consistent and use one  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 21:34, 31 October 2012 (UTC) Avoid using the semi-colon for bolding in references section, as can't be deciphered by screen readers  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 21:56, 31 October 2012 (UTC) NapHit (talk) 17:02, 31 October 2012 (UTC) ref 10 you need to add the author, publication date and its The Huffington Post, which should be in italics.  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 18:15, 2 November 2012 (UTC) NapHit (talk) 13:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC) The final score column should sort by margin of victory not in numerical order I'm not sure I agree with this. It sorts by the Indians score. Most, if not all of the articles sort by that teams score.--Astros4477 (talk) 22:20, 31 October 2012 (UTC) I would expect it to sort by margin not score, be interested to see what other reviewers think. NapHit (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2012 (UTC) The other similar FLs are all sorted on score rather than margin, so that seems to be the consensus as to how to sort this column. Also, sorting on margin could be confusing, since the margin of victory is not explicitly shown - I doubt that readers who sort on this column would generally expect to see a sort based on margin. Rlendog (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support NapHit (talk) 01:25, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 22:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments "Cleveland, Ohio" should be two separate links  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 20:20, 2 November 2012 (UTC) The key table doesn't meet WP:ACCESS, add scope cols and rows to ensure that one does. Headers for the main parameters on key table should use ! rather than |  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 20:31, 2 November 2012 (UTC) No, not done. The key table still doesn't have scope cols and rows. Thus, still doesn't pass WP:ACCESS. The header part is done, though. TBrandley 20:41, 2 November 2012 (UTC) See comment below.--Astros4477 (talk) 20:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC) That doesn't relate to this. The key table doesn't have scope cols and rows, and it still doesn't pass WP:ACCESS. Add them, along with plainrowheaders, as said below. TBrandley 21:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)  Done. I completely read over the first part, my bad.--Astros4477 (talk) 22:11, 2 November 2012 (UTC) The pitchers table has scope cols, but not rows, add rows also for WP:ACCESS The problem with that is, it messes up the align center format.--Astros4477 (talk) 20:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC) No, you add scope="row" then right after add align="center" for every one, sadly. TBrandley 20:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC) Ok I'm still having problems. I've never dealt with this before so I don't know how to do it. I added |scope="row"|align="center"| plus the year and its not working.--Astros4477 (talk) 20:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC) You did something incorrect. It should be !scope="row" align="center" without the extra |, rather than |scope="row"|align="center"|, which is incorrect. TBrandley 20:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC) You're going to have to add plainrowheaders to wikitable once you've completed that to avoid the bold links that will be created as a result of the rowscopes. NapHit (talk) 21:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 21:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC) "#" should not be used per WP:POUND  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 20:27, 2 November 2012 (UTC) "Ref" missing dot period  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 20:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC) Link MLB.com to MLB in references for WP:UNDERLINK  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 20:32, 2 November 2012 (UTC) The alt text of the images are not correct. "Alt text is meant for readers who cannot see an image, such as blind readers and readers who use a text or mobile browser. It should summarize an image's purpose, and should not duplicate its caption, if it were to have one, or does." All images do duciplate a possible caption, or actual caption used. I guess I'm confused by that. If its a picture of a man in a car, what else am I going to put besides Bob Feller waving his cap in a car?--Astros4477 (talk) 20:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC) Just a note, it is for all images, not just that. Regardless, this shouldn't repeat the caption. Rather than saying "Bob Feller", describe him, say "A man that is waving a cap", or something like that. TBrandley 20:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 20:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 19:59, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 22:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Quick comments To avoid repeat Opening Day, instead of "and being named the Opening Day starter is an honor" perhaps "being named the start that day is an honor".  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 19:19, 11 November 2012 (UTC) Last two sentences of first para of lead start with "The Indians..." which is made worse by the first sentence of the second para doing similarly. Repetitive prose.  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 19:23, 11 November 2012 (UTC) Would merge first and second sentence of the second para, the first sentence is tiny.  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 19:24, 11 November 2012 (UTC) "9 wins and 13 losses at Cleveland Stadium and two wins and four losses at" don't mix those formats mid-sentence.  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 19:26, 11 November 2012 (UTC) Check image captions, those which are incomplete sentences should not have a period.  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 19:30, 11 November 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 13:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments – Scope row should be placed on the pitcher's column rather than the season, since this list focusses on Opening Day starting pitchers.  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 02:37, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Column heading "Ref." – replace with "Ref(s)", since some have more than one.  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 02:39, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Remove "Season" and "Meaning" column headings from the key, since the four most recently promoted baseball FLs (Dick Howser Trophy, Branch Rickey Award, 300 win club and Golden Spikes Award) don't have that.  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 02:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC) —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support – meets all 6 criteria. Great work! —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 22:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments – No need to link Gaylord Perry twice in the lead.  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 22:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Second word of Final Score should be decapitalized in the table and key.  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 22:16, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Also, "Champions" should be decapitalized twice in the key.  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 22:16, 16 November 2012 (UTC) In the Addie Joss alt text, "pitchers" should be "pitcher's".  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 22:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Same for the Stan Coveleski alt text, and a space is needed after the word.  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 22:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC) MLB could be spelled out in ref 1. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:19, 15 November 2012 (UTC)  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 22:22, 16 November 2012 (UTC) I have fixed all your comments, Sorry it took a couple days, I'm usually good about responding to stuff within a day but I somehow missed this when looking at my watchlist. Thanks!--Astros4477 (talk) 22:22, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Harrias

Just a couple of comments from me, but for the most part this looks like a very good list. Given the contents of WP:NOSYMBOLS and MOS:ITALIC I don't think it is appropriate to use italics to identify the home ball parks. Well given it's that way in all Opening Day starting pitcher lists, I think we should leave it.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC) Is it worth mentioning somewhere that it also includes those players who were starting pitchers when the team was known as the Bluebirds, Broncos and Naps?  Done--Astros4477 (talk) 22:03, 6 December 2012 (UTC) For 1976, should the location be "Cleveland Stadium" rather than "Cleveland Indians"? Harrias talk 17:17, 5 December 2012 (UTC)  Fixed--Astros4477 (talk) 21:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC) Neutral: the first two issues I raised have not been addressed. These aren't sufficiently obstructive for me to oppose the article's promotion, but I don't feel I can lend it my support, given these concerns. Harrias talk 14:52, 16 December 2012 (UTC) I know they weren't addressed but we want these articles to be consistent and that's how every other Opening Day starting pitcher Featured List is.--Astros4477 (talk) 15:26, 16 December 2012 (UTC) There is no guideline stating that these lists need to be consistent in format. I agree with Harrias on both accounts, if consistentcy is implant than I would changing the other lists to the format Harrias suggested. NapHit (talk) 01:41, 20 December 2012 (UTC) I'll change the second comment but regarding the first, it makes a huge difference, especially in baseball whether a team is home or away and a reader might not know if they were home or away if they're all the same. I feel it makes it seem more clearer. I don't want to have an issue about this, I just feel it benefits the list more than it hurts it.--Astros4477 (talk) 03:18, 20 December 2012 (UTC) I agree with Astros4477. Distinguishing home openers from road openers is relevant. At one point this was done via boldface type for the home stadium, but a consensus later developed for these lists that italics is the most appropriate method of accomplishing this. Rlendog (talk) 14:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC) I don't think Harrias was suggesting that home openers shouldn't be distinguished. What he was referring is that italics is probably not the best way to distinguish them, as those reading wiki on a screen reader may not be aware they are distinguished. I would find out ifusing italics is an accessibility concern, I can't recall if it is or not. As there is little else wrong with the list and I will support once this issue is cleared up.— Preceding unsigned comment added by NapHit (talk • contribs) 04:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC) Absolutely. I concur that the home openers should be distinguished, but our guidelines suggest that italics are inappropriate to do this. Harrias talk 17:44, 24 December 2012 (UTC) What do you think is the best way to do it?--Astros4477 (talk) 02:25, 25 December 2012 (UTC) I would use colour and the double dagger, that should satisfy the concerns. NapHit (talk) 13:37, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

• The fourth sentence includes a lot of nice information that seems tangential at best, and at worst completely unimportant for the rest of the article: they might be about the Cleveland Indians, but does any of the information really have any bearing on the Opening Day starting pitchers?
  • I think you mean paragraph. I wasn't sure but this information is in other Opening Day starting pitcher Featured Lists.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
• Support now that access concerns have been met. Harrias ^talk 07:45, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support - I don't vote on ACCESS criteria, so no complaints there. I'd go with italics and a double-dagger, not color, though. I'd also like to see the sentence bit "which includes the Opening Day starting pitchers from the Bluebirds and the Naps" changed to something that references that those were prior names for the team- I assumed that was what you meant, but it wasn't obvious since you'd never mentioned those names prior. The issue is not enough to withhold my support, however. Consider archiving your references so that if Retrosheet or Baseball Reference ever go down or radically change their site you don't lose all of your citations- I can give further instructions if needed. --PresN 04:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm not too familiar on how to do that but I don't really think that's needed. It's always been stable. Also, I don't think color should be used either, I think there would be too much.--Astros4477 (talk) 05:24, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
    • As long as you use the double dagger I'm not going to make a fuss.NapHit (talk) 11:46, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
      • I agree, italics and a double dagger would be sufficient for me. Harrias ^talk 12:05, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
        • I have added a double-dagger to the home games. I think all the comments have been addressed.--Astros4477 (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 NapHit 08:15, 25 December 2012 [7].

---

Nelly discography

Nominator(s): I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:52, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because having extensively redeveloped all of the prose, tables and references, I feel that it now meets all of the FL criteria. Any criticism would be helpful if it improves the page. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:52, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 23:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments "others – Nelly pursued" I feel that should be semi-colon or period, rather than an en-dash Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) "United States as of January 2011" add comma after "States" Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) "album ever", remove ever, as it doesn't represent a neutral point of view Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) "it reached number one on the Billboard 200" only "Billboard" should be in italics without "200", as done in the above prose of the article Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) "was also released during 2002" instead say "was released in that same year", or something Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) "List of albums, with selected chart positions, sales figures and certifications" missing something? For header, like say it is "Studio albums", then it should be "List of studio albums ...", as done on other discography featured lists, the issue only seems to occur in the "Studio album" and "Other charted songs" sections anyway Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) Notes shouldn't be in capitals, as per MOS:CAPS I cannot recall a single featured list that has not used capital letters for the notes in the past. In truth, I feel that some aspects of MOS are somewhat outdated, as they are meant to reflect general consensus and the wide accepted use of alternative rules suggests changes are necessary. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) Notes shouldn't be in bold, per MOS:BOLD and such There are numerous examples of featured lists being passed that have bolded notes in some way. Also, see my rant on the previous point. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) In notes, the Billboard stuff should be linked Done Linked the first mention on the Billboard Hot 100, as with all of the other charts mentioned in the notes. "Yahoo!." remove the "!" to avoid doubled period glitches caused by {{cite web}} templates Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) In some references, like ref. 12, stuff like "(select "Singles" tab)" I would personally move that to the end of the reference and say "Note: ..." I see your thinking, but I don't think this is necessary. It's kind of the whole point of a "note" section of a reference in the first place, and I think readers would probably interpret the instructions exactly the same way. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) Double quotes (") in reference titles should be single quotes ('), as per WP:MOS, in order to avoid doubling, I see numerous concerns with this in reference titles, please check through Done I think I've removed all of these. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) Too many external links per WP:ELNO, I'd say three at the most Nothing, unless I'm blind, in WP:ELNO on the number of external links permitted. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order in this case Ditto: as far as I can tell, nothing on the order of the links. Besides, to me it seems more logical to place the artists' official website at the top of the list, as it's directly connected to the artist in question and a link of a different nature to the others. The other three, being general sources, are listed together themselves. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 17:26, 4 November 2012 (UTC) I hope that's everything. Thanks for the rapid response. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC) No problem. TBrandley 23:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 23:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

;Comments from Crisco 1492 "making it the fourth highest-selling hip hop album." - I feel like we're missing "of all time" Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 18:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC) were solicited from Nellyville, - So what, you had to ask for them? Done Replaced with the more understandable "released". I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 18:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Double check for hyphens where there should be dashes Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 18:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Any reason for abandoning non-breaking spaces in the article? You appear to have addressed this one yourself. Cheers. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 18:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC) I was referring to the 300+ non-breaking spaces that advisor.js suggests. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Putting non-breaking spaces before dashes in these tables should be avoided, as it moves the dashes off-centre within the cell (slightly to the right). Also, using it reference titles including dashes hardly seems necessary as it does not visibly alter the appearance of the text or make it any easier to read. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:35, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Anything notable about his music videos or other recordings? Done Added a little about "Tip Drill", a rather controversial and notable video. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 18:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC) I suggest you archive the online sources to ensure you don't have a merry time chasing down replacements in a year. Done Archived all of the links I felt neccessary. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 18:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support on prose. Looks like a solid list (seems I missed your replies on my watchlist, sorry!) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:09, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments Is there not a more up-to-date image than a 2007 pic of Nelly? Done Found a more up to date picture. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Is his membership of St Lunatics relevant to this discog? Are you intending to include all his work with that band here? If not, I'm not sure you need so much detail on it. It's only there for a little background on how his solo career began - as I have been told often, the leads to discographies need such background to make them less a jumble of chart positions. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Fair enough but his releases with St Lunatics aren't listed here so perhaps just a single sentence noting his affiliation is all that's required. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Done Cut down info about St. Lunatics to just one sentence. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:52, 23 November 2012 (UTC) Has M.O. been released yet? If not, I would suggest a note to that effect. Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Not keen on the row span for the odd occasion where two consecutive singles chart in the same position. Just keep it simple. Otherwise I'd expect you to row span all those "non-charting" entries... and that would look really messy. And where would you stop? Next you'd have a colspan across an entire single that didn't chart anywhere.... I think you're mistaken. The reason that the chart positions are across two cells are because "Flap Your Wings" and "My Place" were released as a double A-side single in those territories, so they charted together. There's even a note explaining this. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Ok, fair enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Check for misuse of pp. which should only apply to multiple pages, e.g. ref 51. Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 08:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC) What does N/A mean in some of the album cells? Do you really mean "Non-album track"? That's what it means, yes, but I personally don't think it reads that well. The N/A template has been used in a large number of Guest appearance tables in the past to indicate that a song has not appeared on an official album - and, since there's been no real uprising over the issue, I presume that readers can work out what it means in this case. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC) I'm not sure, I've seen dozens of discogs which say "Non-album track" which is direct and clear as opposed to "N/A" which means "not applicable" which is somewhat nebulous. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Hm. Just previewed the table wih "Non-album song" in use and it actually looks OK. However, other editors at FLCs have instructed me to use n/a (which, as you might have guessed, I prefer personally), which is why I usually feel comfortable taking into FLCs. Perhaps we should take a consensus. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 19:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Okay, it's not a big deal but let's see if anyone else has an opinion. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:07, 26 November 2012 (UTC) As this doesn't seem to be going anywhere, I have a proposal: if someone else - just one user - mentions this point in their FLC comments, then I will make the change. If no one does, then it can stay the same. If you disagree with this idea, then I will make your suggested change for consistency's sake. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 10:55, 2 December 2012 (UTC) Never mind. Making the change. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:46, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Holiday56 (talk) 07:27, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments "most successful song for several years" → "most successful song in several years" Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC) The second to the last sentence in the lead ("...the first single from 5.0...") needs to be sourced using ref 3. Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC) The lead reads "E.I. (Reinvention)", while the other charted songs section reads "E.I." (Reinvention). If you choose to use the latter variation, the second quotation mark shouldn't be wikilinked with the rest of the title. Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC) To avoid awkward wiki-linking, used the first option. Holiday56 (talk) 12:15, 21 December 2012 (UTC) All done. Thanks for your comments, as always.I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support Great work on the discography. Holiday56 (talk) 07:27, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 21:06, 21 December 2012 [8].

---

List of battlecruisers

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 15:49, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

This is a list of every battlecruiser completed, cancelled, or planned, by all of the world's navies. The list underwent a MILHIST A-class review here in July, and it's been waiting for me to have enough free time to shepherd it through FLC. It is part of this nearly-finished Featured Topic, the result of collaboration between at least four editors. I feel the list is at or close to the FLC criteria, and I look forward to working with reviewers to ensure that it meets our highest standards. Thanks in advance to those who take the time to review the list. Parsecboy (talk) 15:49, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Support Comments

• Very nice introduction.
• You're inconsistent in the Fate column. Often you used the format of "fate, date" other times you use "fate on date". Pick one and stick with it. Watch for the unbuilt ships as they're fate is often in another column.
• The Kronshtadt entry should be centered vertically like all the other entries.
• Why are the estimated completion dates for the Japanese ships italicized? And why don't they all say projected in parentheses?
• I wonder if there's a way to make the border between ship classes bolder to more clearly distinguish them? And if that's worth doing?
• How many screws for the B-65s?
• Is a note discussing how the Germans classified the Scharnhorsts as battleships necessary to prevent quibbles?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Isn't this already dealt with in footnote one? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 15:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
    • <Blush> Oops, I missed that. I made one small tweak in that note, but otherwise good.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
      • I copied the British table from your list :P
      • Fixed
      • Yeah, I don't know - I didn't catch that when I took the tables from the Japanese list. I just removed the projected dates entirely - seems to be no reason to include them here.
      • I had thought the same thing, but my table skills leave much to be desired, so I don't know what we could do. Anyone else have ideas?
      • Added. Thanks for reviewing the list, Sturm. Parsecboy (talk) 11:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support – I've copyedited the lead; I hope those edits look good. Otherwise I think that most of the content is from the related country battlecruiser lists, so there are only minor quibbles to be addressed (eg Sturm's comments above). Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 15:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Fine work on the lead, Ed. - Dank (push to talk) 21:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. I've looked at the changes made since I reviewed this for A-class. These are my edits. (Edits may take days to show up on that page.) - Dank (push to talk) 21:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 21:06, 21 December 2012 [9].

---

List of international cricket centuries by Younus Khan

Nominator(s): Zia Khan 23:33, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

This list is based upon featured lists of the similar catergory. I feel this is according to the FL criteria. As always, I'll respond to comments/suggestions, from anyone! Cheers, Zia Khan 23:33, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments – "He played 79 Test and 245 ODI matches for Pakistan scoring 6,565 and 6,824 runs respectively." Needs a comma after Pakistan. Add "a" to "Khan scored century on his Test debut...". "Pakistan never lost any of the games whenever he scored a century." "whenever" → "in which"? The S/R for Test number 19 isn't sorting correctly. The ODI table has the Balls column sorting improperly, in addition to its S/R column. Note 1: Opening needs changing to "The previous Pakistan players to score a century on their debut were...". Giants2008 (Talk) 21:27, 1 December 2012 (UTC) Fixed all! Thanks for the comments. Zia Khan 23:27, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 17:59, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments and "the: , I wouldn't quote "the" because it is a basic term Done. Zia Khan 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC) "Khan scored a" don't link "a" in there, due to the fact that it is, again, a basic English term Done. Zia Khan 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC) "he is fourth in the list of Test century-makers" I think "the list" part is redundant, and that little "the list" part should be removed. Rest of the sentence is fine. I think, the sentence flows better in this way. Zia Khan 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC) "List of Test centuries" fails WP:DTT a little bit right now, as it states a table caption shouldn't act as the reader knows the meaning from the title; in this case, "List of Test centuries" should be changed to "List of Test centuries performed by Younus Khan" Although it's not necessary because the article is about Younus Khan's centuries, but I did according to your suggestion. Zia Khan 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC) Same goes for other table captions used, other than the caption for the key table, which seems fine As above. Zia Khan 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 01:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 17:59, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments No need to link "cricket" in the lead image caption. Done. " in Test and One Day International (ODI) matches on twenty and six occasions respectively during his international career" Test and ODI imply international so I don't think you need "his international career". Removed. "He played 79 Test..." has he retired then? If so, this should be noted, if not, this tense needs to be changed. Done. Where does his 20 Test centuries place him in the worldwide list? Added. "s of October 2012, he is fourth in the list of Test century..." what about the list of Pakistan ODIs? Added. "centuries performed by" seems a little odd to say "performed", maybe "scored by"? Done. In the key, complete sentences should have a full stop. Done. " made a triple-century there in 2002." do you mean 2009? Corrected. You link ESPNcricinfo in ref 1 and ref 8 but not for the others. Seems odd. Unlinked ref 8. Zia Khan 00:17, 4 December 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:27, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from —Vensatry (Ping me) 13:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments If he is commonly known by the name "Younis Khan", then why the article is named "Younus Khan". It should be "Younis" per WP:COMMONNAME. Rephrased. Zia Khan 06:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC) Younus Khan has scored 26 centuries for Pakistan in international cricket. It's widely understood that whenever he played for Pakistan, it's an international game. Done. Zia Khan 06:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC) In the ODI table, 101 (109) is better than 101 (119). Fixed. Zia Khan 06:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC) He has retired from T20s, isn't it? Yes, that's why it is "Khan played 25 Twenty20 International (T20I) matches between 2006 and 2010". Zia Khan 06:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC) I meant mentioning that. —Vensatry (Ping me) 11:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC) Done. Zia Khan 12:38, 6 December 2012 (UTC) —Vensatry (Ping me) 03:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support – Good work. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments now that I have an Ipad I can contribute a bit more, so am now able to comment on this list.

• noneed for overall in the bit about all time test scores
  • Done.
• using words like "having" as its an example of NOUN+ ing would change the start of the first sentence in the third para as a result
  • Done.
• the bit about Pakistan never losing an ODI when Khan scored a century needs a ref
  • Couldn't find a ref for that but I think this is not necessary because every century is referenced in the table.

NapHit (talk) 13:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments! I'm a little bit busy too, with my favourite subject. Zia Khan 02:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support meets the criteria. NapHit (talk) 08:02, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 03:07, 15 December 2012 [10].

---

Grade I listed churches in Lancashire

Nominator(s): Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is the next in a series of lists, by county, of Grade I listed churches. It follows closely the format of three previous successful nominations, the last being Grade I listed churches in Merseyside. The text has been copyedited, and there is a linked article about every church in the list. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 00:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments "Lancashire is a county in North West England." that is a short sentence, can more be merged? Yes, but I do not see any advantage to be gained. It is concise and precise, giving the non-UK reader a simple, exact definition. IMO to combine it with the next sentence (or part of it) would make it complex and possibly confusing. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) "This is a complete list of Grade I listed churches and chapels in Lancashire as recorded in the National Heritage List for England." that hasn't been on FLs for some time now, I'd just removed that sentence. I'm not sure that is correct. This sentence was used in Grade I listed churches in Merseyside, promoted only on 18 September 2012, and before that on the corresponding lists for Greater Manchester and Cheshire. As it stands, it shows that the list conforms to attribute 3 (comprehensiveness), and that its source is impeccably authoritative. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) I would merge so that there are only three paragraphs, instead of four, as some as shorteish Not sure about this. Para 1 deals with the area covered by the county, para 2 with the listing criteria, para 3 with the history and architecture of the churches, and para 4 with economics and geology. The only short one is 4, and I do not see that sitting comfortably with 3 (but I am willing to be converted). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) "Buildings in England are given" were? No "are". Listing is an ongoing process; buildings are continually being listed, delisted and regraded (see [11]). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) "per cent" merge into one word Wictionary gives "per cent" as an acceptable alternative, explaining that it is used mostly in the UK. My Chamber's English Dictionary gives "per cent", but no entry for "percent". --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) "mainly" to "generally" Not at all sure about this; it does not seem to say what I mean it to say. What is the consensus on this? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) Per MOS:NUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 4 metres, use 4 metres, which when you are editing the page, should have an " " in the middle of 4 and metres for that I have found only two examples of this, both in the refs, which I have fixed (using {{space}} rather than " "). Have I missed any? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise, such as "some", etc. For example, "All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green." Will look through the list, although I thought that the copyeditor had dealt with this. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) Some "some"s deleted. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:02, 4 October 2012 (UTC) I noticed that the alts to all images are missing periods at the end of them Fixed. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) Don't use a ; semi-colon, as it is an WP:ACCESS issues, use actual sub-section headers, or something else, although the first is appreciated. Missed that; thanks. Fixed. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) I would use {{cite web}} or one of those cite templates for all references Why? I have never understood why there are two systems, or what is the advantage of one over the other. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 23:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the trouble you have taken over the review. As you see, I am not in full agreement with all your comments. I should welcome comments from other reviewers, and shall of course fit in with any consensus. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 00:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks — especially for accepting our "differences". --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:10, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 08:17, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments "Lancashire is a county in North West England. In 1974 parts of the historical county of Lancashire" reads repetitively to me, and our link says they're "historic" counties, not "historical"... In fact, you mention Lancashire four times in the first three sentences. Corrected "historical" to "historic". I've deleted the following "Lancashire", but retained the others because they form part of the titles of different administrative regions. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC) Last para sort of goes back to discussing what you were talking about in the first para including (this time) a link to the 1974 reorganisation. Seems a bit odd to go back there. I've deleted the first sentence, rewritten the second, and merged the last two paragraphs (this also deals with one of the comments made above).--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC) "from the 15th-16th century" I think date ranges like that need an en-dash per WP:DASH. Fixed. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC) Any context for who Sir Pudsey was? I've added that he was lord of the manor, with a reference. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 11:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support a very good list indeed, and one which should be thought of as a good current template for such lists. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:43, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments

• "Paley and Sharpe" perhaps use their full names on first use?

Only issue I could find, great work. NapHit (talk) 16:39, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• Did you mean "Paley and Austin"? The problem with this is that, as the list is sortable, there is no "first use". And there were two Paleys, and two Austins at different times. The links take you to the complex but precise part of the Sharpe, Paley and Austin article, which deals with the relevant phases of the practice (which existed for more than 100 years!). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, as it seems this is more complex than it first appeared, I'm for it to remain this way. As see no other issues and believe the list meets the criteria, I Support. NapHit (talk) 19:32, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from BencherliteTalk 20:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

*Excellent work, as ever. I note that some of the references have "." after them (e.g. "Hartwell & Pevsner 2009, pp. 332–334.") but your website ones don't (e.g. "Listed Buildings, English Heritage, retrieved 12 May 2012") because you're mixing families of citation templates. Changing {{citation}} to {{cite web}} will fix this, FYI, although it's not a very big deal. Otherwise only two comments, I think, both about the opening paragraph, strangely enough. I think it would be better to use an official copy of the 1972 Act at [12] rather than Wikisource, but unitary authorities post-date the 1972 Act anyway, so you might be better off finding a more modern source for the county history/structure; not terribly controversial but good to back it up. Secondly, and it might just be me, I still end up slightly puzzled as to whether this is a list of churches in the non-metropolitan county, or the ceremonial county.... BencherliteTalk 10:21, 12 December 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the comments and advice. I have in fact got rid of all the "."s by adding a "ps=" field to the sfn templates. I've added the source for legislation as you suggest, and found links to other relevant (and I hope the correct) parliamentary acts. And I've clarified that the list relates to the ceremonial county. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:46, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

• Grade I support. You make it look so easy, but an awful lot of work has clearly gone into all of this. Bencherlite^Talk 20:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support An interesting, well researched and comprehensive list and the perfect complement to other Lists of Grade I listed churches.J3Mrs (talk) 12:53, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 20:49, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

*Comment Another good example of these county-based lists, which have established a clear and user-friendly "house style". I concur with the supporting comments above, but just a few small observations: On St Patrick's Chapel, Heysham, the coordinates are labelled "St Peter, Heysham". The coordinates themselves are accurate. Some of the ALT text for the images has typos, as follows: Bolton-by-Bowland, Churchtown, Colne, Stydd ("of" should be "or"). ALT text for St Michael's on Wyre: "diagonal clock face" → "diamond-shaped clock face"? I am satisfied that the list is comprehensive: that is, all Grade I-listed churches in the ceremonial county (Lancashire + Blackburn w/ Darwen + Blackpool) are included. To confirm this, I have been through the National Heritage List for England's lists of Grade I buildings for each of the three areas. I also checked the Google mapping of the coordinates, to ensure that all were correctly plotted; they were all fine. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 12:40, 13 December 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the comments. All fixed. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support based on these small changes and the one below. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 20:49, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

• Comment Lead says "and a part of West Yorkshire was transferred into the county" – West Yorkshire did not exist until 1974 so nothing could be transferred, probably you should refer to the West Riding of Yorkshire which existed before 1974. Keith D (talk) 14:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Nice one! Thanks; corrected. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Support' Thanks for the change. Look forward to some more of these lists. Keith D (talk) 21:40, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 03:07, 15 December 2012 [13].

---

Latin Grammy Award for Best Short Form Music Video

Nominator(s): Jaespinoza (talk) 02:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because because I think it is spelled correctly and is based on references checked in detail; this list is part of the Latin Grammy Project to elevate all categories to FL status. I will be watching closely the comments of the reviewers, appreciating your interest in improving the list. Thanks. Jaespinoza (talk) 02:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Erick (talk) 15:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

*Comment Very good work. Here are some fixings that needs to be on the references: FN 10, publisher should be Time Inc. Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 06:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC) FN 3, work should be ABC News and publisher is American Broadcasting Company. Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 06:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC) FN 16, work should be ABC (newspaper) and publisher is Grupo Vocento. Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 06:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC) Avoid WP:OVERLINK. For example, only the first instance of Los Angeles Times and Tribune Company needs to be linked. Erick (talk) 23:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC) Fixed. Thanks Erick! Jaespinoza (talk) 06:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

• Support Great job! Keep up the good work! :) Erick (talk) 15:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

• Comment: The references should have their own section. ajmint (talk•edits) 14:35, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 19:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments good work. "Babasonicos" is missing a diacritic. Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 10:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC) The "last awarded" field in the infobox is typically only used for defunct awards. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:19, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Fixed. Thanks for your comments. Jaespinoza (talk) 10:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments per WP:CONTEXTLINK bold links should be avoided add plainrowheaders to wikitable sortable to solve the issue Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Avoid using the semi-colon for bolding as is done in the reference section. Its a WP:ACCESS concern, as those using screen readers can't pick it up. Use the conventional three apostrophes instead Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) ref 8 has an odd spelling of September Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) ref 10 Time Inc has two full stops after it NapHit (talk) 19:10, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 22:43, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments Unlink music videos per WP:OVERLINK Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 19:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC) Perhaps use actual sub-sections for general and specific in references, for WP:ACCESS Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 19:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 02:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 22:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• Quick comment – In the Rene Perez photo caption, wouldn't "with the music video for" be better as "for the music videos" in this sentence? In particular, we shouldn't be using "video" when giving three videos. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 19:02, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Comment I would imagine that each song should be notable enough for its own article (e.g. the unlinked songs should be redlinked) as they won a Latin Grammy. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Done. Jaespinoza (talk) 07:10, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Support no reason this shouldn't be featured now, good work from the nom and from the reviewers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Jaespinoza (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 03:07, 15 December 2012 [14].

---

List of The Office (UK TV series) episodes

Nominator(s):  ajmint  (talk • edits) 16:54, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have recently written its lead, added an image of the creators, added references for each episode's plot and alternative title and copy edited the plot summaries for each episode. I believe it is now of similar quality to other featured episode lists such as those of Peep Show or its American adaptation. Please let me know if I'm doing anything wrong as this is the first time I've done this. Thanks,  ajmint  (talk • edits) 16:54, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

*Check reference titles for WP:DASH (i.e. use en-dashes, not spaced hyphens) and avoid the SHOUTING that may be in there. Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 20:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC) BBC refs have "last updated" dates in them, these can be added as publication date. Do you mean the months, like "August 2009"? If so, should "2009-08" be used? Also, do you know if BBC News should use {{cite web}} or {{cite news}}? ajmint (talk•edits) 20:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC) Well, I prefer human readable dates in any case, so would prefer "August 2009" and the accessdate as 10 September 2012...! As for the citation template, I tend to use the Cite web one, but as long as you're consistent throughout, I don't think it really matters. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Have switched dates to "10 September 2012" format, added BBC months and used {{cite web}} for BBC News. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Don't think you need to link television programme in the second sentence of the lead. I would think that linking story arc would be more beneficial to our regular readers. Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 20:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC) " paper company" -> "paper merchant" Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 20:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC) Four paras in the lead for a reasonably short list seems a lot per WP:LEAD? I'd appreciate your advice on which bits to shorten; could the first two maybe be merged? ajmint (talk•edits) 20:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC) On second thoughts, how about just scrapping the second paragraph? The characters are basically introduced by the episode summaries anyway. ajmint (talk•edits) 21:29, 9 September 2012 (UTC) Perhaps you could merge the last two paragraphs a trim a tiny bit? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:44, 10 September 2012 (UTC) I have merged the last two and shortened the characters and awards bit. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Will get to the main part of the list in due course, but must pause now to watch the closing ceremony of the Paralympics! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:46, 9 September 2012 (UTC) Thanks a lot for your help! ajmint (talk•edits) 20:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC) More Can you use No. instead of # for number please? Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Where are production codes referenced? I have removed them, they don't add much and I can't find any sources. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) "an irritating middle-aged man who thinks" maybe "a middle-aged man who mistakenly thinks..."? Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) No need to link superimposed. Unlinked. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) "and unfortunately for him" not sure this is needed? Removed. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Not sure "peeved" is the encyclopedic language I'd expect in an episode summary. I think perhaps there's a general tone issue with the summaries, maybe get someone to have a look through them? Have replaced it with "annoyed" and made some tone edits, but they could maybe be tweaked a bit more. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) In other media, I wouldn't have a subheading (there's only one subsection so it's not needed) and I would merge the paras. Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 07:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Thanks! ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Suggest withdrawal unless someone can address Giants' concerns above, the main contributor has made one edit in the last couple of weeks, this nomination is stagnating. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC) I've addressed the source concerns because I'd hate to see a wonderful candidate like this be failed. I'll also address new concerns if they come around. TBrandley 23:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• Many episodes lists have "No. in series" and "No. in season" (or similar wording) to reflect the overall number of the episode and the season number of the episode and do this with two columns rather than having the text in the title of the episode.
  • The titles of The Office episodes are generally given as "Episode One", etc on the BBC website and in the script books (although the DVD menu uses digits for the numbers), but there are alternative ones, available on the BBC website for series 1 and on epguides for both series. Since the former "Episode X" ones are definitely the standard titles, I think they should be used along with the alts in the title section, and since they also include the number in the series, I don't think two columns are necessary. I'd be interested in your opinion, though. ajmint (talk•edits) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 01:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments Tables don't met WP:ACCESS, add scope rows and cols to ensure it does Done for columns, don't think there are any row headings. ajmint (talk•edits) 14:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC) "CS" doesn't make sense to me; perhaps clarify Should "Christmas Specials" be written fully in the summary table? ajmint (talk•edits) 14:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC) "Epguides" shouldn't be capitalized Fixed. ajmint (talk•edits) 14:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC) Use single quotes (') in references rather than double quotes ("), per WP:MOS Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 14:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC) Don't use mixed formats in external links Some of them use fixed templates; what wording/format would you suggest? ajmint (talk•edits) 14:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC) No worries! I got them myself. Cheers, TBrandley 01:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 13:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC) Thanks for your input! ajmint (talk•edits) 14:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

• Support looks good. Well done! TBrandley 01:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks! ajmint (talk•edits) 13:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 22:24, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments "The Office has won numerous awards, including two British Comedy Awards[7][8] and a Golden Globe,[9] and later came 25th in the BBC's Britain's Best Sitcom poll." the first and should be removed and a comma should come after Awards I disagree – that wording sounds awkward and ungrammatical. ajmint (talk•edits) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) It needs changing regardless, having and ... and is not encyclopaedic. I would just have two separate sentences instead. NapHit (talk) 13:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC) Have reworded and separated with a semicolon. ajmint (talk•edits) 16:41, 25 September 2012 (UTC) "It has also been remade in several different countries." this sentence appears to be a bit of an afterthought, would expand bait, perhaps mention the American one as I imagine that is the highest profile remake Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Per WP:CONTEXTLINK bold links should be avoided, bolding in the series overview table primarily Done, although, could the links not be bolded if the numbers in the series column were made into row headers? ajmint (talk•edits) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Also, I have noticed that this is done with the American version, The Simpsons and many other featured lists, and that the table looks rather bare without it; I think that the guideline refers mainly to bold links in prose, and that they should be acceptable in this context. Perhaps reconsider? ajmint (talk•edits) 16:41, 25 September 2012 (UTC) Those lists were promoted before this became an MOS issue, many recent episode lists promotions do not have bold links. MOS:BOLD is very clear that bold links should be avoided, aesthetics is not a valid reason to keep them. NapHit (talk) 22:24, 25 September 2012 (UTC) "David reprimands Tim. Tim reveals that it was in fact David's friend Chris Finch who created it" avoid using the same word to end and start a sentence Reworded. ajmint (talk•edits) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) "In disbelief over him having offended new employees on the first day, Jennifer, promoted above Neil, reprimands David." I would try and reword this sentence it reads uneasily. Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) refs should be in numerical order, currently the refs for the christmas specials are not Swapped. ajmint (talk•edits) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) ref 53 needs a publication date adding Done. ajmint (talk•edits) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) NapHit (talk) 18:36, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• Support meets the criteria. NapHit (talk) 12:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 16:19, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Source comments – What makes epguides (ref 33) a reliable source? From our article on the site, it appears to be composed of user-generated content, which is usually a disqualifier for reliability purposes. Done. TBrandley 23:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC) The replacement reference has a formatting error. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Fixed. TBrandley 03:33, 16 November 2012 (UTC) What makes Ars Technica (ref 53) reliable? Giants2008 (Talk) 18:29, 28 October 2012 (UTC) I'm no expert in this, but it appears to be reliable, as it appears on Google News. Further, based on its website, it does really seem reliable. Why wouldn't it be though? TBrandley 23:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Google News does include the occasional websites that we wouldn't consider reliable. Is there any stronger evidence, such as reputable ownership or content being cited by mainstream media? Giants2008 (Talk) 03:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC) It is owned by the reliable company, Condé Nast Publications, that publishes other notable magazines, such as W. TBrandley 03:33, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Support after a revisit, looking good! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 20:04, 7 December 2012 [15].

---

List of aircraft operated by Scandinavian Airlines

Nominator(s): Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

As you may recall from my previous nomination, Braathens was bought by its larger competitor, Scandinavian Airlines. This is an airline that really liked buying aircraft, resulting in a much longer list. Thankfully, a Swedish gentleman has written a book about all of SAS' aircraft, making research much the more easier. Hopefully the list is to your liking and not too overwhelming. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 19:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments Add alt text to the images, as per MOS:IMAGES and WP:ALT; it should briefly explain the contents of the images, not duplicate their captions. Alt text is meant for readers who cannot see an image, such as blind readers and readers who use a text or mobile browser. I have no idea what should be written in alt text, but I have made an attempt. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Per MOS:NUM and WP:NBSP, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 737ng, use 737 ng, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 737 ng Added, although it makes the source nearly impossible to read (which is why I often leave non-breaking spaces out. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Missing a period at the end of "SAS' operations in Norway were under the SAS Braathens brand between 2004 and 2007, here shown on a Boeing 737-600" image caption Fixed. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) "Scandinavian Airlines or SAS" how about "Scandinavian Airlines (SAS)"? My though was that SAS is not an abbreviation of "Scandinavian Airlines", but rather of the full name, but if that improves readability then your proposal is better. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) "previously" you are missing known as, "previously known as" Fixed. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) "Headquartered outside Stockholm, Sweden" then where is it exactly then? Added. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) "main hubs" what are hubs? Could that be explained I have linked it. It is a very well-known term within aviation and would be extremely tedious to explain in a brief one-paragraph summary of an airline. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) "through" to "throughout" Thanks. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) "A notable naming exception was Huge Viking, used for a Boeing 747." remove notable per WP:NPOV and WP:OR Hall's coverage of this doesn't make it OR, but I can remove it just the same as I agree it is not optimal. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Regarding that same sentence, have "which was used ..." there instead of the last part which is just "used for a Boeing 747" Good idea. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) References need to be after a type of punctuation, as per MOS:REFPUNC, as seen as a problem in ref. 16, etc. That guideline states: "The ref tags should immediately follow the text to which the footnote applies, including any punctuation..." Note that this indicates that if there is punctuation, then the tag should follow it. In this case the tag is referencing the first part of the sentence while a distinct reference is verifying a different piece of information and to avoid the reader having to double their verification work it is better to be as specific as possible. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Move the first image in livery to the right side, as per MOS:IMAGELOCATION I can move it down a paragraph, but placing that image on the article would be very unaesthetic, as aircraft should always be pointing towards the middle of the screen. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) "the current quantity operated as of September 2012" are you sure that it was as of then, or you just say that, as it was September 2012 at the time? The last four MD-87s were retired on 2 September, which also happened to be the time that the list was verified. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Regarding that sentence, it has no reference Of course it doesn't because it is not attempting to verify anything. It is stating what the creator of the list has chosen to include. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) "Ref(s)" is missing a dot thing at end of it Added. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Ref. 18 and 67 both contain WP:DASH problems, it should be an en-dash, not a hyphen, per that The sources use incorrect hyphens, so it is always a dilemma if the source's title should be reproduced verbatim or corrected. I've fixed ref 18, but I honestly don't see the issue in 67. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Don't use doubled quotes inside reference titles to avoid doubling, as per WP:MOSQUOTE and MOS:QUOTEMARKS. The problem occurs in ref. 26, 62. That can again cause problems for searching for the article in question, but if it makes you happy I can always change it. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Instead of saying stuff like "Hall: 51–52" why not say "Hall, pp.51-52" i.e. to avoid confusion, or having people needed clarification for it Several reference styles use the colon, which may even be more understandable for some readers (particularly foreign) than the pp you propose. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Any external links? No. External links are a last resort and anything relevant is included as a reference. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Any portals to add using {{portal box}}, remember to add portals that related very much to this topic/subject Added. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order Why? Wikipedia:Categorization states "The order in which categories are placed on a page is not governed by any single rule (for example, it does not need to be alphabetical, although partially alphabetical ordering can sometimes be helpful). Normally the most essential, significant categories appear first." Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC) I ran the Citation bot. TBrandley 01:54, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Thank your for the comments; they are most appreciated. Arsenikk (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 19:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Comment Excellent work, as always. While I don't have much experience with FLC-nominations, I wondered if the title correct? Shouldn't it be plural like "List of aircrafts operated by Scandinavian Airlines"? --Mentoz86 (talk) 14:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. The plural of "aircraft" is "aircraft" (just like coincidentally the plural of fly is fly in Norwegian). Arsenikk ^(talk) 16:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments really nice list. "Carlzon" livery or "Carlzon livery"? Be consistent. Consistenitized. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "The aircraft livery were thus painted..." not sure that reads right to me. "The aircraft were painted with a livery including..."? Not sure. Rephrased close to your proposal. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Don't think you need to link "shield". Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "which saw white body " -> "saw a white body"? Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "and dotted with while aircraft" don't understand. This is what I'm trying to explain. I've tried to explain a bit better, and changing "while" to "white" hopefully helped a bit. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "SAS has since 2002 had selected" not great. "Since 2002, SAS has painted selected ..." Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "DNL on their side had" no need for "on their side" really. Removed unnecessary superfluous redundancy. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "Foo Viking" could you give a couple of examples? Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "mythology, huge was the quickest of everything" do you mean "Huge"? and what is "quickest of everything"? Do you mean the quickest of the Gods. Rephrased to make this clear. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "Viking references, he also proposed that the Viking name" a bit repetitive. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "but ownership was by the time of delivery " -> "but, by the time of delivery, ownership..." Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Not sure there's a need to have Luftwaffe in italics. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "could not be used during winter" could you explain why? Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "intercontinental traffic" -> "intercontinental routes"? Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "One aircraft crashed..." well, it was destroyed in a mid-air collision so perhaps be a little more descriptive. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "They were .. but was..." grammar fail. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "Some of the aircraft were from 1962" -> "From 1962 some of the aircraft were..." Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "airlines highest cruise speed though history" airline's highest cruise speed in history. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "The aircraft was.." were. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "optimized...optimized" repetitive. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) In the McDonnell Douglas DC-10-30 entry, link NYC first time round. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) ", the planes " would stick with "the aircraft". Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Dash 8 on the Saab 2000 line is a dab. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "started planning revamping"... awkward triple verb and ing ing... Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "in an offensive attempt" not sure you need "offensive" here. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) "it was grounded after the September 11 attacks" why? Explained. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 09:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Thanks fro the comments. Arsenikk (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Ure weclom. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support an excellent list, good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 19:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments "newest intercontinental aircraft" I think Intercontinental should be capitalised I check a number of sources and two dictionaries, none of which capitalize the word. As far as I can see it isn't a proper noun, so I have kept it it in lower case. Arsenikk (talk) 17:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC) No problem I wasn't sure myself, so though it was worth asking. NapHit (talk) 19:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC) "SAS Commuter was created in 1984 to operate regional airliners, various models which remained in use until 2010." I don't understand what this sentence is trying to say, a word might be missing? Rephrased slightly, hope it reads better now. Arsenikk (talk) 17:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC) NapHit (talk) 16:32, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support meets the criteria NapHit (talk) 05:56, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

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

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 The Rambling Man 18:42, 6 December 2012 [16].

---

List of songs recorded by Adele

Nominator(s): AARON• ^TALK 11:09, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... I worked hard to completely revamp the list and order it into a fully functional and easy to navigate list. I have followed the criteria, which I used for List of songs recorded by Rihanna and List of songs recorded by Leona Lewis, both of which were promoted to FL. (I have received permission from the FL delegate Giants2008 to have a second nomination at FLC as my other nomination, List of songs recorded by Alexandra Burke, has three supports and all comments have been addressed). AARON• ^TALK 11:09, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments "English singer-songwriter Adele has recorded material for a two studio albums" material should be songs and a should be removed "has been featured on songs on other artists respective albums and has recorded the eponymous theme song of the 23rd James Bond film Skyfall (2012)." remainder of the sentence doesn't flow very well. would change to collaborated with other artists on their respective albums and recorded the eponymous theme song of the 23rd James Bond film Skyfall." "label mate" I would remove this, its irrelevant they're signed to the same label Is it relevant to this list mentioning she met the producer Jim Abbiss, while recording a song. He is not in the scope of the list, so I would remove it. That sentence is poorly written, so think it would be best its removed "The first single released from 19 was..." this is not professional standards of writing change to "Chasing Pavements', co-written by Adele and Eg White was the album's first single." "She and White also co-wrote other songs on the album, including "Melt My Heart to Stone" and "Tired"." -> They also co-wrote two other songs: "Melt My Heart to Stone" and "Tired" "Adele also collaborated with Sacha Skarbek..." Not keen on sentences starting with "In..." its poor prose. Sentences with this prefix need revising Still one example of this at the end of the second paragraph. NapHit (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2012 (UTC) Done. AARON• TALK "The album saw Adele work..." again not professional standards of prose change to "Adele worked with writers from 19, as well as new ones. You link James Bond and Skyfall twice in the lead, one is enough No need for the colour indicating Adele was the sole writer of the song. That is indicated by the fact she is the only person in the writer column for that song I want to keep that. It's easier to see and the names don't blur into each other that way. AARON• TALK If you're listing songs by letter then "I'll be Waiting" should be before "If It Hadn't Been For Love" as this is what happens when you press the sort key, so it should be that way to begin with ref 2 hyphen should be an en dash The Telegraph is actually The Daily Telegraph NapHit (talk) 22:19, 19 October 2012 (UTC) Done all, apart from the two points with a reply. AARON• TALK 00:33, 20 October 2012 (UTC) I would state when 19 is released, I also don't think you need to include the year of the release in brackets after the album. You always bracket the year the album was released the first you mention an album. AARON• TALK Been looking at other music lists here and none of them due it. I don't see any value it would be better if you wrote it out in prose. For instance this sentence: "The singer released her second studio album 21 (2011)." makes no sense, its an incomplete sentence at the moment. NapHit (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2012 (UTC) It's in all Rihanna GAs/FAs for sure, as well as the Leona and Beyonce ones. I did have it as part of the prose, but you didn't like how I had done it. AARON• TALK Its need to be in prose in this sentence: "The singer released her second studio album 21 (2011)." as its not gramatically correct at the moment. Also you need to explicitly state in prose when 19 was released as you suddenly jump into talking about the album's first single. This should be done to ensure the prose flows and there is no ambiguity for the reader. NapHit (talk) 22:32, 20 October 2012 (UTC) This still needs to be done, you can't have a sentence like this: "Adele released her second studio album 21 (2011)." in what is supposed to be our best work. Remove the brackets and write it in prose, there is no guideline stating otherwise. NapHit (talk) 14:20, 29 October 2012 (UTC) Removed. AARON• TALK 19:22, 1 November 2012 (UTC) You still have the brackets for guest vocals, I don't see the point of this to be honest, you could just remove it or write in prose, instead of bracketing a link to something without context. For someone unfamiliar with music and who doesn't know what the brackets are advocating that is going to be confusing. NapHit (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Sorry I didn't see those ones. AARON• TALK 19:44, 1 November 2012 (UTC) "in October 2012 to co-inside..." typo on co-incide also change the bit after to "with the film's release" Done. AARON• TALK 19:44, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Following on from TRMs point on the album sorting, the explanation you gave makes no sense at all. The album column should sort alphabetically by album name, not by another factor as that is irrelevant to the column. It just sorts the tables, I can't help how it sorts. It sorts the albums by alphabetically order of the song. I don't know why. AARON• TALK 19:44, 1 November 2012 (UTC) NapHit (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Yes you can help how the table sorts. Use the {{sort}} template to make it sort alphabetically seeing as that is what the column is supposed to and what people would expect. NapHit (talk) 19:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Where do you put it? I don't understand how to use it. AARON• TALK 22:08, 1 November 2012 (UTC) I was hoping to provide an example for you to use, but for some reason the column continues to sort in the same manner. Very strange, can't work out what is causing this. Mentioned it here and an explanation has been provided. NapHit (talk) 22:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Oppose suggest you ask for a copyedit before nominating lists with so many errors in the prose I'm afraid. Just basic failings, poor grammar etc. Please check image captions which aren't complete sentences don't have full stops. Removed. AARON• TALK " for a two studio albums "? Removed. AARON• TALK "on their respective albums" what does "respective" mean here? On the other artists respective album... AARON• TALK Maybe better to say "on each of the other artists' albums". The Rambling Man (talk) 13:55, 28 October 2012 (UTC) "During this time, the singer contributed guest vocals on a song by Jack Peñate, entitled "My Yvonne" (Matinée, 2007).[2] "Chasing Pavements", co-written by Adele and Eg White, was the album's first single" doesn't flow because the first sentence is not talking about "the album" that the second sentence references. Changed. AARON• TALK "of the song's were " no need for the apostrophe. Removed. AARON• TALK "as the single's" same. Removed. AARON• TALK "The singer released..." you've mentioned two other singers in the meantime so you need to reinforce Adele here. Added. AARON• TALK "Adele worked with writers from 19, as well as new ones." horrible sentence, basically she worked with people... Reworded. AARON• TALK "7x platinum " we usually use a multiplication sign rather than a simple x. And in prose, it would be better as "seven-times". Changed. AARON• TALK "With Adele, Dan Wilson co-wrote "Someone Like You", Fraser T Smith co-wrote "Set Fire to the Rain" and Ryan Tedder co-wrote "Rumour Has It" and "Turning Tables".[6]" confusing sentence, jumbled information and not elegant. Changed. AARON• TALK You mention Skyfall theme tune at the beginning and at the end of the lead, no need to repeat this. Removed. AARON• TALK How does "Album(s)" sort for you? Very odd for me. It is sorting the albums by alphabetical order of the name of the song. AARON• TALK Surely it should sort albums by the name of the album? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:55, 28 October 2012 (UTC) Our article on "Someone like You" doesn't have a capital L for "like". Changed. Always used to. AARON• TALK Any way of knowing this list is complete? All the songs from her albums on the final tracklisting are here. I can add four songs into a new section called "Unreleased recorded/written songs" from ASCAP and BMI, but we don't know if she recorded them or what album they were for. Only that she wrote them. Three of them were with Epworth so I'd take a guess at those ones being for 21, but couldn't reference it here for sure. AARON• TALK 12:08, 24 October 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 15:35, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 15:24, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Oppose not up to featured list standards The image size should be much bigger, as done at List of songs recorded by Alexandra Burke, your most recent featured list Increased. AARON• TALK Could you come up with a more interesting caption, such as something notable or interesting by Adele; for example, "Adele has had __ singles", just an example there, but for what its worth Wouldn't I need a source for that (which I doubt exists) otherwise it's original research? AARON• TALK As done on most featured lists, just use something interesting, etc., that is already in the article and sourced, and place that statement there in the image caption. TBrandley 23:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Will do tomorrow. AARON• TALK 23:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Done. AARON• TALK 14:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC) "English singer-songwriter Adele" missing "The" at the start Alexandra's, my most recent FL, does not have this. I believe it's superfluous. AARON• TALK "has recorded songs for two studio albums" so, that's doesn't sound right, it sounds like she just recorded songs for two studio albums", that's odd, needs some copy-editing or cleanup It's the same as Alexandra's. AARON• TALK "which was released" per the rest of the sentence add "ultimately" before "released" Added. AARON• TALK ""My Yvonne" ," fix up the big whitespace from the ending quote to the comma next Done. AARON• TALK Check for your consistency on using a comma after "and" and not doing so, doesn't matter which, just be consistent I never write "and," so I'm pretty sure I'm being consistent by not doing it all. AARON• TALK Nope, sentences like "However, the majority of the songs were written solely by Adele, including "Best for Last", "Crazy for You" and "First Love", as well as the singles "My Same" and "Hometown Glory"." use it one way, and sentences like ""If It Hadn't Been For Love" was a B-side to "Rolling in the Deep", and was included on the UK, Poland and Bulgaria limited edition bonus tracks versions of 21's track listing." use it the other, like with that comma before "and". Please check the whole list for occurrences! TBrandley 03:53, 8 November 2012 (UTC) You said it doesn't matter if I do or don't, as long as I stick to one. I don't use it, so what's the problem? AARON• TALK 14:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC) "Adele released her second studio album 21 in 2011." reference? Find a reliable source please Added. AARON• TALK The reference is fine, but that new one contains WP:DASH concerns, hypten should be an en-dash, and the location parameter should be removed on that reference per WP:CITE. It says location parameters should be used only for news or newspaper sources, such as The Guardian, and not regular web sources. TBrandley 23:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Fixed dashes, but there is no location parameter. I don't use it. So I don't know where you're getting that from. AARON• TALK 23:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Well, it is used. Look at this, "iTunes Store (GB)" GB is the location parameter. Remove per above reasoning. TBrandley 03:53, 8 November 2012 (UTC) It's not used. Go to the article, click edit, and search for a location parameter. You will not find one. There is nothing wrong with stating that it is the GB iTunes store. It's used in countless articles, and nothing says you can't abbreviate a country like GB. AARON• TALK 14:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC) "Adele released her second studio album 21 in 2011. In addition to reuniting with writers whom she had previously worked with on 19, Adele collaborated with a set of new writers and procuders." Adele is used right in two sentences, hence why in the second one, change to "The artist" or "she", etc. Changed. AARON• TALK Also in that sentence in the very above issue, check your grammar on "procuders", it is supposed to be "producers" Corrected. AARON• TALK "written by Adele" add "which was" at the start Added. AARON• TALK "it has been certified seven-times" what? Clarify it is the song, I think, that's right? Changed. AARON• TALK "the pair" clarify again, I don't see "the pair" mentioned until farther up again I've only used "the pair" once. AARON• TALK "co-incide" what's the point of the hypten. Removal unless good reasoning is found, it is "coinclide" Removed hypen. It's coinside, not coinclide. AARON• TALK Tables don't meet WP:DTT, add table captions to ensure it does ? AARON• TALK If you don't know what it is, click on that link I gave you. Also, for it, you add |+ table caption to the top of table, a little below wikitable. The table caption should explain the contents fully of table, like "The X-Files season 9 episodes". For an example, please see List of Grey's Anatomy episodes. Unrelatedly, instead of "List" used as the header, instead say "Songs" or "List of songs", etc. TBrandley 23:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Still don't get it. AARON• TALK 23:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC) ?? AARON• TALK 14:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Done myself for MOS:DTT. TBrandley 15:24, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Link Adele in the tables per WP:REPEATLINK Not for the Artist(s) column, no. Rihanna's, Leona's not Alexandra's do this. In fact, it was advised not to, which I agree with. It's pointless. Adele is linked in countless other places, and it is after a list of her songs. Your reasoning is not valid. It should be linked, regardless. The MOS clearly says "links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead." She is always linked as the songwriter. And emphasis on "may be repeated" in "links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead." Which means I don't have to. AARON• TALK 14:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Don't "shout" in reference titles I'm not, anywhere. AARON• TALK Yes, you are. See ref. 8, "SEARCH" is in captials, it shouldn't be, per the general consensus. TBrandley 23:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC) That's pre-loaded into the reference, so no, I'm not actually "shouting". It can't be changed. I never "shout" in references. AARON• TALK 23:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Any external links, with WP:ELNO in mind? No? There must be a list of Adele's songs recorded listed on some reliable site, like AllMusic and such. TBrandley 23:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC) So where shall I put AllMusic? AARON• TALK 23:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC) In external links, if there even is one? TBrandley 03:53, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order in this case Done. AARON• TALK Add links to the song names, artists, etc., in notes section, per WP:REPEATLINK Done. AARON• TALK 14:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Link Adele, songs, albums, and such in images per WP:REPEATLINK also Done. AARON• TALK 14:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 01:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC) OK. TBrandley 15:28, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Comments I have further comments before this candidate can be promoted: "for two studio albums as well as several collaborations" what does the end of that mean? Would suggest rewording, moving around, or something, doesn't make sense, need to clarify Have reworded. AARON• TALK "with record company XL Recordings" surprised this concern was missed, should be "with recording company XL Recordings" instead That implies that they are a recording company who record songs. Have changed to record label. AARON• TALK Change "During this time" to "At this time" Changed. AARON• TALK Change "However, most of the songs were written solely by Adele" to "However, most of Adele's songs were written solely by her" There is still an inconsistency with placing commas before "and", and not doing so at other times Where? I don't see any problems. AARON• TALK "List" should, yet again, be changed to "Songs" Changed AARON• TALK Again, any external links? Yep. Even threw in a See also too. AARON• TALK TBrandley 23:34, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Comment suggest you try to gather some more interest from the discog community here, you've had plenty of very good reviews, but very little support. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:54, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Have done. AARON• ^TALK 12:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 19:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments: I'm leaning to support, but there are a few concerns I would like to raise for the lead: "English singer-songwriter Adele has recorded songs for two studio albums and has collaborated with other artists on songs from their respective albums." – I'd probably use "for their respective albums" since it sounds odd saying collaborate from an album. I removed that part of the sentence days ago, not sure how you are seeing it here. AARON• TALK Comma after "Matinée": "During this time, the singer contributed guest vocals on a song by Jack Peñate, entitled "My Yvonne", from his debut studio album Matinée released in 2007." Is that sentence the example you want me to change it to? Even though you say to put a comma after "Matinée" but don't in your example? AARON• TALK Yes, add a comma. I meant that you should put a comma in that sentence, which doesn't have one right now. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 20:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Added. AARON• TALK 20:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC) "The first single to be released from 19 was "Chasing Pavements"" Removed. AARON• TALK "most" is usually preferred over "the majority". Changed. AARON• TALK Perhaps "by" instead of "of" here: "Adele appeared as a featured artist on another song of Peñate's entitled "Every Glance"" Also, another thing I'd like to add is that the "released in [year]" phrase is used twice. I was wondering if you could change one of them, to something like "[year] studio album" instead of "second studio album". That would be less repetitive. Changed both. AARON• TALK "The lead single from the album, "Rolling in the Deep", which was co-written by Adele and Paul Epworth." - unfinished, perhaps join with next sentence and cut "since its release in the US"? "which" isn't there though. AARON• TALK Weird, I'm sure I copy and pasted directly. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 20:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC) "Along with "Rolling in the Deep"" – not needed, we know this. Reworded. AARON• TALK There should be an apostrophe in "albums second single". —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC) There already was. AARON• TALK 17:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Either I'm seeing things, or I've gone out of my mind, or both. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 20:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Support – well, this FLC racked up quite some Supports overnight. Here's mine, and keep up with the song lists, Aaron! —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 19:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• Lol thanks. AARON• ^TALK 19:39, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

;Comments from Crisco 1492 "After she signed a contract with record company XL Recordings in September 2006, Adele began to work on her debut studio album, 19, which was ultimately released in 2008." - Don't think you need "ultimately". Look at TBrandley's points above. AARON• TALK Doesn't look required to me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Adele collaborated with Sacha Skarbek on the single "Cold Shoulder", and recorded a cover version of Bob Dylan's "Make You Feel My Love". - Perhaps "She also collaborated with Sacha Skarbek on the single "Cold Shoulder" and recorded a cover version of Bob Dylan's "Make You Feel My Love"." Changed. AARON• TALK Adele appeared as a featured artist on another of song of Peñate's entitled "Every Glance" from his second studio album, Everything Is New, released in 2009 and on Daniel Merriweather's "Water and a Flame" from his second studio album Love & War, released in 2009. - Perhaps "In 2009 Adele appeared as a featured artist on two songs: another collaboration with Peñate's, entitled "Every Glance", and Daniel Merriweather's "Water and a Flame"." The albums are fairly irrelevant here, I think. I've already changed this per Wikipedian Penguin's comments above. AARON• TALK That's still a lot of clauses and commas. A way to further trim this sentence woul dbe preferable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Changed. AARON• TALK 23:17, 12 November 2012 (UTC) as the theme tune to the James Bond film of the same name to coincide with the release of the film. - If it's the theme tune, it's implied that it is to coincide with the release of the film. One of the two clauses should be trimmed. Yeah, it was released to coincide with the film. AARON• TALK You haven't addressed my comment — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Because I'm not really sure what you want me to do? You said it implies that the song was released to coincide with the release of the film, as it says, and I replied saying yes, as it was released to coincide. AARON• TALK "If it's the theme tune, it's implied that it is to coincide with the release of the film. One of the two clauses should be trimmed." — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC) I have changed it about. AARON• TALK 23:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC) How is an album absolved? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC) It's a synonym for "released" AARON• TALK 00:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC) I've never heard or read it used like that. You are likely to confuse readers. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:11, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Well, it is another word for it. Lol. Better than saying "released" twice in the same sentence. AARON• TALK 00:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC) I did the change myself. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC) The clause is not really that much shorter than what it was. AARON• TALK 00:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Are you serious? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC) I'm talking about prior to that change I made. AARON• TALK 00:37, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Once again... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Yeah, I don't think it's that much shorter. Anyways. AARON• TALK 00:49, 13 November 2012 (UTC) File:Adele - Live 2009 (4) cropped.jpg - Your source parameter and author parameter show different file names. One's a redlink Not sure what I'm mean't to change to? AARON• TALK Fixed. — Oz (talk) 21:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Other images look peachy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support on prose and images. Fairly solid, makes me think that a List of songs recorded by Gita Gutawa would be viable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:05, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks. AARON• ^TALK 01:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support I'm sure MTV News UK isn't meant to be italicized in ref 11 but overall the article looks good. — Oz (talk) 21:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks :-). Yeah I made it non-italics. AARON• ^TALK 22:43, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support After taking a deep look, it is worth the little broze star. Good job, Calvin. Congrats. — ΛΧΣ21™ 01:48, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks :-) AARON• ^TALK 10:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Made a slight copyedit to the article before commenting, everything is now fine. Till 06:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks :-) AARON• ^TALK 10:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support. I question the importance of "Indicates song written solely by Adele", but other than that it's a well-written and referenced list. I must say, that the note "DO NOT REMOVE... THE DAGGER IS TO HELP COLOURBLIND PEOPLE, OR PEOPLE WHO HAVE DIFFICULTY DISTINGUISHING COLOUR." should probably be rewritten, as it comes off a bit out putting, in my opinion. Something like "Do not remove the dagger; this is a requirement per Wikipedia's guidelines on colour." would work much better. Statυs (talk) 14:51, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks :-) I think it's important to note the songs which singer's solely wrote. I included those warning notes only on Adele list because of difficulties I was having with a user who kept removing them. Lol. I have changed it though. The capitals were only for effect at the time! AARON• ^TALK 18:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

  No problem! Yeah, I know that type of situation all too well. I disagree, but it's no reason not to support the list. Great work! Statυs (talk) 01:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

  I agree with Status's suggestion – I'm not sure that it's entirely relevant to highlight which songs were written just by Adele, as the Writers column of the table already makes this clear. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 13:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Per the comment above. Good job! — Tomíca^(T2ME) 15:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks :-) AARON• ^TALK 18:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 03:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments – Comma needs to be removed after Matinee. Would have been nice if people had read that closer before running to support. Wikipedian Penguin said to add one. AARON• TALK 12:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Well Wikipedian Penguin got it wrong. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Removed. AARON• TALK 18:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC) I should have read that carefully; I did not notice the "released in 2007" had been changed to "(2007)". Sorry about that. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 19:58, 14 November 2012 (UTC) In the List of songs section heading, the first two words aren't really needed since it's obvious that this is a list. Not sure they're necessary in the table caption either. That was added by a reviewer. AARON• TALK 12:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Suggest you remove them. No need for the superfluity. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Removed. AARON• TALK 18:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Two of the photo captions need periods at the end. I've always been told not to, and I think someone said above not to, but okay. AARON• TALK 12:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Complete sentences, e.g. "Dave was nominated for a Grammy." needs a full stop, while "Grammy-nominated Dave" doesn't (it's not a complete sentence. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Already said I have added them. AARON• TALK 18:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Is note 2 covered by the source for that song? It strikes me as something that could use a cite. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Look on the track listing for the album on the album article. AARON• TALK 12:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Actually, all notes should be referenced. And since you've been asked, you should do that per WP:V. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC) In the note itself? AARON• TALK 18:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Makes no sense. AARON• TALK 17:27, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Yes, in the notes. If you want an example, take a look at Ricardo Arjona discography#Notes. — ΛΧΣ21™ 00:36, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Any progress here? I have to admit that I'm upset that nobody caught these issues earlier. It makes me question how thoroughly the first eight supporters actually looked at the list, and how much they were influenced by the message the nominator left on FLC talk. It just doesn't look good, no matter the (positive, I'm sure) intentions of everyone involved. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:22, 22 November 2012 (UTC) I've already said it makes no sense to me and I don't understand how do it. AARON• TALK 00:35, 22 November 2012 (UTC) You need to. The issue is that you used <ref></ref> to add the notes, and then this renders impossible the addition of a ref inside a ref. I'd recommend you to change the format to {{sfn}}, or to {{ref label}}/{{note label}}. This way, you can add the citation. How come it does not make sense to you? The note says: ""Fool That I Am" was a B-side to "Hometown Glory" and was not included on any version of 19's track listing." How do we knoe this is true? Cite it with a liner notes, or something like that and it's done. — ΛΧΣ21™ 06:35, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Because I didn't know that format rendered it impossible, no one said. Problem with FLC/FAC is that people say things and assume you know how to fix something, if you don't and you ask, then you're accused of not being cooperative. AARON• TALK 11:34, 22 November 2012 (UTC) If you get confused over how to format something, the best thing you can do is to find an article that has the requested item and see how it is formatted there. That's how I learned to edit on Wikipedia. If you can't find an appropriate model article, ask the reviewer on the review page where you can find an example of whatever is being asked for. In this case, Hahc happened to provide an example for you to look at, and I suggest using its formatting to fix the problem. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Yeah and I looked at it, but I don't see how alphabetical letters equates to a reference? It's not clear at all. AARON• TALK 23:09, 22 November 2012 (UTC) They don't equate to a reference. The alphabetical letters are the notes, and on each note, you add the text and the reference. Example: Inside the table, you have "A Better Life"[A], which is done by adding {{ref label|PMF|A|A}} besides the song name. Then, on the Notes section, you add this followed by the note: *{{note label|PMF|A|A}} This song was not included on any studio album, but released as a B-side.<ref>The reference goes here.</ref> And it's done. — ΛΧΣ21™ 23:19, 22 November 2012 (UTC) I'll have to do this tomorrow, it's late and doing my head in. AARON• TALK 23:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Any progress yet? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC) I couldn't find the songs on iTunes, but they were recorded anyhow. AARON• TALK 00:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC) (outdent) If the songs can't be verified by a reliable source, then they shouldn't be included in the list. Aren't there album notes or something that you can use? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC) I have used album notes for them. AARON• TALK 21:36, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support - Not much to read, but the prose are pretty thorough, the article is well sourced and very organized! Nicely done :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 01:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks. AARON• ^TALK 12:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• One thing; ref 12 if I stand correctly the proper publisher is Guardian Media Group; only thing fault I see. Another great list Calvin congrats. AdabowtheSecond 19:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

  That's the Owner, the Publisher has an "and" in it. AARON• ^TALK 10:56, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

  Correct just checked the article on The Guardian. *The more you know*. Well then I Support. AdabowtheSecond 15:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments Looks good, overall. Made some edits here; please revert if you don't like the changes.

• Remove from the Contents all the links that don't go anywhere, i.e. A, G, J, K, Q, U, Y and Z.

  Removed. AARON• ^TALK 20:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

• Remove "her second studio album" in the Ryan Tedder caption, as that's already specified in the caption of the image above it.

  Removed. AARON• ^TALK 20:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

• Might be worth considering removing the N/A template in the "Fool That I Am" row and replacing it with a link to "Hometown Glory", since that was the relase where the song was originally featured. Of course, that would mean renaming the "Album" column to "Original release" or something.

  I think it's fine as it is. There is a note for it anyway. AARON• ^TALK 20:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

  True, but you could equally make that argument for, say, any album that isn't 19 or 21 – just stick the N/A template in the relevant box and then have a note at the bottom saying on which release the song was featured. The advantage of having all the information stored in the table is that it is then all in one place – a reader doesn't have to keep scrolling to the notes at the bottom to learn else. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs)

A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 13:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

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

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 The Rambling Man 18:42, 6 December 2012 [17].

---

List of Vancouver Whitecaps FC players

Nominator(s): – Nurmsook! ^talk... 04:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I went through this article and brought it up to a standard that is fairly consistent with other featured lists of this type. This list was modeled after List of Seattle Sounders FC players, which is a Featured List. Hopefully you will agree, but I am here for any changes necessary! – Nurmsook! ^talk... 04:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• Quick comment from me: Lee Young-Pyo should sort under "L", not "Y", as Lee is his family name. Harrias ^talk 09:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks! I've made the change. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 13:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 21:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments Alt text needs to be added to the images, per MOS:IMAGES and WP:ALT When writing standard abbreviations, the abbreviations should not have a 's' to demark plurality (for example, change kms to km and lbs to lb). Add scope rows for WP:ACCESS in the tables I fixed some issues myself TBrandley 15:20, 7 October 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the comments. I addressed the first and third points, but was not sure what you meant by the second. I did not see any instances of abbreviations with a 's' to demark plurality. Any specific example from the article? – Nurmsook! talk... 15:37, 7 October 2012 (UTC) That one was just bot-generated, don't worry about it. Also, you didn't put the correct alts in. "It should summarize an image's purpose, and should not duplicate its caption." Other than that, it looks good, good work! TBrandley 15:40, 7 October 2012 (UTC) Made further changes to the alt text. You'll have to forgive me, it's been a few years since I've gone through the FA/FL process, and back then alt text never came up. Let me know if this is sufficient. – Nurmsook! talk... 20:20, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 21:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 20:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Oppose Lead is too short, would expect at least two fairly decent size paragraphs I'm not sure why you have a separate table for goalkeepers, there should just be one table with all players in regardless of position Position column should sort by position, not alphabetically as it currently does You should use {{dagger}} instead of the normal dagger, as those using screen readers cannot identify the standard symbol I don't think that contents box is needed, no point when the majority of the table is visible anyway Personally I would structure the table to something along these lines My biggest concern is what is referencing the table. The general link does not provide any info on appearances, so the table is effectively unreferenced Not sure you need the colour and symbols actually. It is evident by the year column what players are still at the club, as they will have a dash next to the year Table needs rowscopes per MOS:DTT NapHit (talk) 18:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC) Alright let's see if I can cover this all off. 1) I expanded the lead a bit, but please let me know if you have any suggestions as to what should be included. I think its just about ok now. As the club was only formed a few years ago, I'm not sure what more you could include. NapHit (talk) 19:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC) 2) I joined the goalkeepers into the main table (Sounders FC had them separate, but I suppose it makes more sense to keep it all in one). 3) Sorted the position column by position. 4) Got rid of the current players dagger/color scheme. 5) Got rid of contents box; you're right, the table is far too short for it right now. 6) I decided to keep the structure as is. I think it is beneficial to the reader to keep the stats separated by competition, similar to how things are done in player articles. To each his own I suppose. Not a problem, but there is no point having the MLS and CCL cup columns when none of the players have appeared in it. NapHit (talk) 19:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC) 7) I've added another reference, and made the existing one more specific. I can't find an "all-time roster" list online, so for now, statistics databases are the best alternative (unless I reference each individual player?). I think it would be preferable to individually reference every player, as those pages have the appropriate details. One detail they don't have though is the CCL stats, which need sourcing as well. Just noticed Soccerway does, so would individually ref using both whitecaps and soccer way sites NapHit (talk) 19:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC) 8) See #4 9) Added rowscopes. Here's hoping this satisfies all of your concerns! Thanks for the comments! – Nurmsook! talk... 02:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC) I've removed the two blank columns and added individual references. – Nurmsook! talk... 18:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support meets the criteria. NapHit (talk) 02:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments "Whitecaps FC began playing competitive soccer in the 2011 season. It plays its home games at BC Place, competing in the Western Conference of MLS." reads choppy to me, could you elegantly merge these sentences? I always thought it was "distinct from" not "distinct to"... No need to link France for French. "As of October 22, 2011" but the statistics in the table are "as of October 2, 2012" so shouldn't this part of the lead be updated? E.g., three keepers have been used now. I would force Klazura to sort as if he had played zero games, right now he sorts as having played the most games etc because of the em-dash. Don't like the two empty cells in the key table. Key table isn't accessible. Don't need "Vancouver Whitecaps" as a category (and shouldn't that be "Vancouver Whitecaps FC" in any case?) as you have a more refined Vancouver Whitecaps FC players category. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the comments. I believe I have addressed all of your concerns. – Nurmsook! talk... 18:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

;Comments from Crisco 1492 Your newspapers should be in the work parameter, not the publisher parameter Is linking BC really necessary? I think that would constitute a major geographical designation, per WP:OVERLINKING.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC) I made the changes to the newspapers, but left BC linked. I don't really think provinces or states are major geographical designations, outside of the countries they are located within. – Nurmsook! talk... 20:44, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support on prose. Looks fairly strong. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:38, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments from Arsenikk ^(talk)

• You are free to make the lead image larger, but please make it 300px so people who have set their default image size to 300px don't get a smaller image.
• Could you link the names of players in the captions.
• Although the first sentence contains a lot of important information, it is too long to read comfortably.
• In my opinion, BC is obscure enough that it does not constitute a "major geographical designation" (per Crisco's comments above) and I support its linking. It is also directly relevant to the scope of the article rather than being mentioned in passing.
• Could you mention that Vancouver is in Canada.
• Digits and named numbers should not be mixed in the same sentence, so either "3 goalkeepers and 45 outfield..." or "three goalkeepers and forty-five outfield..."
• Countries should not be linked; although tables are permitted to relink, they are still not permitted to overlink.
• Please include a "total" row for caps and goals for the combined MLS and CC matches.
• Any chance you could create a stub on Caleb Clarke? One missing red link draws down the table a little.

Otherwise looks nice. Arsenikk ^(talk) 16:45, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I addressed all of the comments you made except for mentioning that Vancouver is in Canada (I think that this is addressed in the opening sentence, "Vancouver Whitecaps FC is a Canadian soccer club..."). I also left the countries all linked. Perhaps you can chime in more about this but in almost every FL players article similar to this that I have seen, the countries are always linked. If you could just elaborate on why the links need to be removed, I'll address that. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 22:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Don't link countries because the MOS says so and because links to countries provide very little value. Take a look at Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates/Archive 16#linking countries in tables. WP:OVERLINK is very specific about countries being linked is not permitted except with good cause. Tables are allowed to repeat links, but unnecessary links cannot be introduced just because they are in a table. Do you not find it odd that 'Canada' is not linked in the lead, despite that it is of high context for the topic, while every nationality for every player is linked? Arsenikk ^(talk) 19:25, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

I certainly see where you are coming from, but even in the brief discussion that you linked there really did not seem to be any consensus, considering the widespread use of this template in tables. If this is a true stinging point, a pass/fail point if you will, then I suppose the change might be necessary. However, when I look at current nominations, recent promoted FLCs, and existing FLs, there is a trend to stick with this (List of Queens Park Rangers F.C. players for instance). Because of that, unless other users think this is a stinging point, I'm going to follow their lead and IAR this, although it seems to me that regardless of the MOS policy, the consensus is that linking countries in this type of table is relevant, particularly when you consider that many of these players have international caps for those countries. That's just my opinion on the matter anyways; this issue never seems to be consistent. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 20:27, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

• As Nurmsook says, there is no consensus for tables. The fairly recent CPJ International Press Freedom Awards also has all the countries linked, although admittedly some of the countries aren't very well recognised. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:51, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Oppose for non-compliance with the Manual of Style. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:19, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this issue? Giants2008 (Talk) 18:12, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not too worried about the countries being linked. It's hard, in this case, to definitively state that Ghana or Malta or Gambia should be linked while Scotland and England and China shouldn't. I'd suggest all are linked or none are linked. And given how useful links to the former places may be for our global audience, I'd suggest linking all countries, as otherwise it'd look very strange. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

• I've made my opinion clear above and at CPJ International Press Freedom Awards. All is fine, nothing is fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support, looks a good list to me, and the prose is fine. Harrias ^talk 18:10, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

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

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 The Rambling Man 18:42, 6 December 2012 [18].

---

Bruno Mars discography

Nominator(s): Statυs (talk), ΛΧΣ21™

Bruno Mars is a very successful singer-songwriter, who has sold 6 million albums and 40 million singles worldwide; with three of his singles being among the best-selling singles of all-time. We are nominating his discography to become a featured list because we feel that after our work on it, it now meets the FL criteria. Statυs (talk)  and ΛΧΣ21™ 04:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 06:07, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments Unlink studio album per WP:OVERLINK Same goes for singles, promotional singles, music videos WP:OVERLINK does not apply for such links; if you were to ask an average person who isn't familiar with music terms what a studio album, extended play, etc. was, they probably wouldn't know what they are. They are linked once in the article, which is an appropriate amount. Zac  04:21, 30 September 2012 (UTC) Avoid doubled periods in references, which is normally caused by cite template glitches If you point me which references have doubled periods, i'd be amazingly glad. You know, looking for doubled periods is like looking for a mice in a 50-story building; awful and time-wasting. — ΛΧΣ21™ 04:23, 30 September 2012 (UTC) Done. Zac  04:34, 30 September 2012 (UTC) Done the rest myself. TBrandley 06:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC) Don't use mixed date formats for references Done. Zac  04:28, 30 September 2012 (UTC) Don't "shout" in reference titles All capped text in the references goes that way. Like ARIA stands for Australian Recording Industry Association and needs to go capped, as an example. I don't see any text in caps that shouldn't be that way. — ΛΧΣ21™ 04:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC) TBrandley 04:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Support TBrandley 06:08, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the support TB! Zac  07:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Although Bruno doesn't have much releases and this discography is small, it is well written, the tables are well organized and the references are in fine condition. Good job! — Tomica (talk) 16:57, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks Tom! Zac  20:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:35, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments with an oppose right now.... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 8 October 2012 (UTC) Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC) *"selling 12.5 and 10.2 million " I would say "selling 12.5 million and 10.2 million..." Done. Zac  10:50, 2 October 2012 (UTC) "the soundtrack of the name" something's missing here. Done. Zac  10:50, 2 October 2012 (UTC) ""It Will Rain" was a" no need to so quickly repeat the song name. Done. Zac  10:50, 2 October 2012 (UTC) Does DK mean Denmark? Isn't it normally DEN? Done. Zac  10:50, 2 October 2012 (UTC) ""Gold–/Platin-Datenban...." en-dash or hyphen? Both are cited on the website. Zac  10:50, 2 October 2012 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 09:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC) Pick one or the other, probably hyphen. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC) I suppose so. Done. Zac  02:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC) Where are the release dates referenced, and what territory are they relevant to? The date they were first released, whichever territory that may be. WP:DISCOGSTYLE calls for the "Earliest release date". Zac  10:50, 2 October 2012 (UTC) Sorry, I'm not really bothered about DISCOGSTYLE, I'd like you to specify which territory each release date is relevant to, and provide a citation for that specific information. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC) I've tagged a couple of the issues now. Also, the EP is not referenced in the citation you've provided. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC) I'm unsure why, but the source doesn't name the title of the EP. Again, that is not a issue. If you think you need to cite the release date, you'd also have to site the label and formats, with your logic. This is a list. Zac (talk · contribs) 13:54, 17 October 2012 (UTC) Of course it's an issue, it means the EP and its release and chart information is entirely unreferenced... And where did you get the release dates? If you could cite the label and formats, that would be a bonus too. Where did you get the information on labels and formats? And yes, I'm fully aware it's a list. What difference, in your mind, does that make to asking for verifiable sources? Also, according to sources I've read, it made it 97 on the UK charts, so why isn't that included? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:11, 17 October 2012 (UTC) I don't exactly get the issue here. Are you asking an additional reference because the source given doesn't display the name of the EP? Doesn't the release/formats information already exists in the article of the extended play? As far as I know (and talking insode the FLC scope), the information may be cited if a dedicated article for it doesn't exist. Correct me if I'm wrong. — ΛΧΣ21™ 18:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC) Yes, the information for this list should be verifiable within this list i.e. not assuming that because a link is blue, it's referenced. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:30, 17 October 2012 (UTC) This appears to be a new opinion you've had, because I've seen you supporting FLs without such a thing. As for it's 97 position, that was on the UK Singles Chart. Album positions have to have consistency. Zac (talk · contribs) 23:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC) It doesn't appear to be new, it is reasonably new. Just like making tables comply with WP:ACCESS used to be new. Why would an EP be considered on the album chart and not the singles chart? If it charted at 97 on either of the album or singles chart, why isn't that information included in this list? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:19, 18 October 2012 (UTC) Key word, new to you. It doesn't appear to be any issue with anybody else. Another thing, shouldn't the release years of each single be referenced as well then, if so should the album release date? Take a look at the studio albums section, under UK. Tell me which chart that links to. There's your answer. Zac (talk · contribs) 22:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC) Please consult WP:V for information that may have been challenged (i.e. like in this case). The Rambling Man (talk) 12:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC) I have (finally) found another source for the 99 chart position, and added it to the article. I've also added refs where the date can be found. I hope you are satisfied. Zac (talk · contribs) 19:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Till 01:54, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Oppose— I'm not liking the "two singles—"Just the Way You Are" and "Grenade"—were released" and "Two additional singles—"Marry You" and "Count on Me"—were issued from the album" parts. Why not just state the singles without using the dash? Till 13:51, 2 October 2012 (UTC) You may not like it, but it's grammatically correct. Zac  15:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC) I never said it was gramatically incorrect, it's just uncomfortable to read. Till 15:32, 2 October 2012 (UTC) You never stated that it was uncomfortable to read, you stated that you didn't like it. The titles are interrupting an already written sentence: "Two additional singles were issued from the album". Zac  20:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC) True, I stated that I didn't like it, but because it's uncomfortable to read. What other remotely decent reason would the be to complain about it then? The dashes makes the reader pause which is uncomfortable. Till 04:49, 3 October 2012 (UTC) Atop is archaic and should be changed. Awkward: "both songs were a commercial success worldwide, with the former reaching the top of the Billboard Hot 100." Redundant wording: "and went on to sell six million copies worldwide", "as a result, it is also among one of the best-selling singles of all-time". Till 22:45, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

• Since you clearly can't make up your mind whether or not to want to support or oppose, your comments will be ignored from now on. Zac (talk · contribs) 22:51, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Let's keep the discussion calm, shall we? If issues have been pointed out, we most certainly aren't going to ignore them. I think the dashes are comfortable reading myself, but the others are worth addressing. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:06, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
    • Everything have been fixed by now :) — ΛΧΣ21™ 18:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Anything new in this FLC? It has been opened for over a month and all issues have been fixed. — ΛΧΣ21™ 02:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 11:21, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments Not a fan of sentences starting with "In..." its poor prose. I would suggest rewording sentences that start with this prefix Only one sentence is in said format, and it can't be changed around. Zac  20:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC) I'm sorry but there are two sentences that start witht hat prefix and yes it can be changed around. This list is supposed to feature "professional standards of writing" to quote the criteria, currently I disagree that is the case, especially with some of the examples below. NapHit (talk) 22:26, 4 October 2012 (UTC) Right two, my mistake; I didn't see the "In May" one. That one has been adjusted, but there's no way to rearrange "In early 2010, Mars provided guest vocals on the debut singles of American rappers B.o.B ("Nothin' on You") and Travie McCoy ("Billionaire"); both songs were a commercial success worldwide, with the former peaking atop the Billboard Hot 100." Zac  00:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC) I'm concerned that the majority of the lead is not referenced. Especially statements such as "Mars began his career, in 2009, as part of the production and songwriting team, The Smeezingtons." which are not well-known facts. Anything that can be challenged needs referencing. I thought it myself as a known fact, so I will add a citation for it. There was one previously, but I removed it, thinking it wasn't really needed. Zac  00:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC) Done. Zac  00:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC) "The Lazy Song", peaked within the top ten worldwide, and with sales of 6.5 million copies, is also among one of the best-selling singles." Sentence has a mixture of past and present tense which is a grammar fail What would you suggest then? The song isn't still peaking, so it already peaked, and the song is still among one of the best-selling, so it can't be was. Zac  00:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC) I've edited it myself to solve the problem, was trickier than I thought to resolve the issue. NapHit (talk) 11:21, 5 October 2012 (UTC) "Two additional singles—"Marry You" and "Count on Me"—were issued from the album; both receiving moderate commercial success." Another one Done. Zac  00:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC) ref 1 needs the parameter |format=PDF adding and the number of the page that is being used Done. Zac  00:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC) NapHit (talk) 19:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Conditional support, but I've noticed that the lines in the empty cells are not aligned centrally - they appear to actually aligned slightly to the right. Apart from that, this is very good. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 13:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

  Could you show a screenshot of such? It appears centered to me. Zac (talk · contribs) 17:50, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

  I don't know where an appropriate place would be to upload a screenshot for such a small purpose. In any case (unless I'm seeing things), no matter what browser I try the lines do look aligned to the right (although only very slightly). An examination of the wikicode shows that instead of a space separating the pipe from the dash, there appears to be an NBSP instead. This makes the gap between the pipe and the cell slightly wider, shifting the lines out of position. Sorry for the delay in response. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:55, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  Hmm... I'm not actually sure why a NBSP was added to that. I don't recall it being there before. I will remove it. Statυs (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  A-ha! I see what you are talking about, I see it too. After taking a closer look. Statυs (talk) 22:20, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thank goodness I'm not seeing things. In any case, as this has now been resolved I'll offer my support. Good job, as always! I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 18:52, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thank you! Statυs (talk) 15:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 11:52, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments: There are some prose issues in the lead, as well as sourcing concerns. They're as follows: Bruno Mars is not a "singer-songwriter". The term is often misused, referring to artists that write and record their own songs, but that is not all. According to the Wikipedia article of singer-songwriter: "As opposed to contemporary popular music singers who write their own songs, the term singer-songwriter describes a distinct form of artistry, closely associated with the folk-acoustic tradition." Would you like a citation? There's plenty available. Not only does he sing and write his own songs, he composes and produces them. He's not an "often misused" example, referring to a singer who occasionally writes some of their songs. Those would be the origins of a singer-songwriter. Please take a look at the first sentence of the same article. Statυs (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC) The term applies to more acoustic-oriented musicians, like Adele and Paul McCartney. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 10:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC) Sorry but no: the term applies to all musicians that write and record most of the songs they sing. It does not applies to acoustic-oriented musicians only. — ṞṈ™ 00:41, 7 November 2012 (UTC) There are superfluous commas in this sentence: "Mars began his career, in 2009, as part of the production and songwriting team, The Smeezingtons." All commas in that sentence are correct, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Statυs (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC) They also break it up into short choppy sections. The sentence flows better without them. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 10:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC) Done. Statυs (talk) 12:57, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Fused participle: "with the former peaking atop of the U.S. Billboard Hot 100". You're gonna have to be specific about what the issue is. Statυs (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC) Noun+ing structure: (with [noun] -ing).This should be reworded so that the participle does not proceed the noun. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 10:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC) Again, what is wrong with actually showing someone what is wrong? i.e. how it should be written. Statυs (talk) 00:47, 7 November 2012 (UTC) You can try "as the former peaked atop the U.S. Billboard Hot 100". Also, there's no "of" after "atop" (most likely just a typo). —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 20:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Done. Statυs (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC) "went on to sell" should be "sold" here, "The album peaked atop the charts in several countries and went on to sell six million copies worldwide." Done. Statυs (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC) "'Just the Way You Are' and 'Grenade' reached the top of several charts across the world, including the United States, Australia, Canada, Ireland and the United Kingdom." – the list of countries is unnecessary. How is listing the countries both songs went number one in "unnecessary"? Statυs (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC) Is this a complete list of the countries? If so, then just remove the "several charts across the world, including" and get to the point. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 10:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC) Have you checked the list? "Just the Way You Are" and "Grenade" topped like +15 national charts each one. These written there are only the ones they have in common, mostly. — ṞṈ™ 00:50, 7 November 2012 (UTC) I do not see the problem with removing the list. We know it charted in several countries, and that's all needed to be known. 20:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Don't you think that just saying ""Just the Way You Are" and "Grenade" reached the top of several charts across the world" doesn't really give anything though? It reads like a broken sentence, to me. Statυs (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Oh well, then. I'm probably just making a mountain out of a molehill. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 23:22, 7 November 2012 (UTC) "The album's third single, 'The Lazy Song', peaked within the top ten worldwide, with sales of 6.5 million copies." – "in" instead of "within" is plainer and simpler. Also, the 6.5 million figure needs a citation. Fixed and there is a citation. Statυs (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC) There is redundancy in this sentence: "As a result, it is also among one of the best-selling singles of all-time." The hyphens in "all-time" are not needed. I don't see any redundancy in the sentence. Statυs (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC) The strikethrough-ed phrases make the sentence longer than it needs to be. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 10:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC) As a result of selling how many copies it sold, it is also, along with the other song, one of the best-selling singles. I really don't see what the problem is, truly. Statυs (talk) 00:47, 7 November 2012 (UTC) At least cut "also" and remove the hyphen. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 20:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC) 'Done. Statυs (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Check for consistency in wikilinking in the references. Some refs have publisher locations, but others do not. Check for consistency. WP:CITE says that locations should be used for newspaper/news sources, but not for regular web sources. That's why, so it's fine. TBrandley 00:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Good point. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 20:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC) —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 01:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support; Iz very good. AdabowtheSecond 15:20, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thank you for your support! Statυs (talk) 15:24, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

  The thing is I had been looking previously at this FL candidate, so decided to finally comment and most certainly deserves the star. AdabowtheSecond 18:57, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 23:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

*I don't see (maybe I'm just goin a bit batty) the 6M claim for the album represented in the given source. Replaced reference. Statυs (talk) 14:00, 20 November 2012 (UTC) A lot of over-linking in the references You can either link all, or link just once. Statυs (talk) 14:00, 20 November 2012 (UTC) You list 44 million units here, why not in the article? Unless its an unverified claim. Where does the article mention 44 million units? For what? Statυs (talk) 14:00, 20 November 2012 (UTC) IFPI should be linked sooner It is already linked in the albums section. Statυs (talk) 14:00, 20 November 2012 (UTC) I think it would be nice to add some critical commentary on some of his songs. Maybe, explore on the contrast between the sound on "The Lazy Song" and "Heaven". You know, don't just list sales, tell me about some genre experimentation. Other important stuff. A third lead paragraph would suit this article nicely IMO.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 07:57, 20 November 2012 (UTC) I disagree. This is a discography list. Adding information about the song of the music is what the specific album and song articles are for. Maybe List of songs recorded by Bruno Mars eventually. Statυs (talk) 14:00, 20 November 2012 (UTC) That's fine. What I meant was you write on this page he's sold 44 million singles. Unless this is just your math, it should be added. As for the IFPI, its linked in the albums section and then again as a lead artist, however as IFPI SWI and not DEN. Either removed or switch.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 22:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Ah; it's been so long, I forgot what the nomination said... HAHA. I honestly don't remember where that came from, it's been so long. It's been said he has sold 6 million albums (which has a source), but the 40 million singles; can't find a reliable source for that one. Statυs (talk) 00:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

• Support --CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 23:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks Nathan! Statυs (talk) 15:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 02:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments – "As a result, it is among one of the best-selling singles of all time." No need for "one of" when "among" conveys the same meaning. True. Fixed. Ref 16 is a bare link to a blog, which is quite possibly an unreliable source. I removed it. [Who the hell added that!?] The blog is owned by AOL, how is that unreliable? Statυs (talk) 00:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Verified. it is indeed reliable. I have readded and formatted the source. — ṞṈ™ 00:26, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Just because the blog is owned by AOL, it is not necessarily reliable. Is the author a recognized writer in the music industry? If so, I'd feel better about this reference. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:35, 23 November 2012 (UTC) AOL is a big (and clearly notable) company. AOL Music Blog is their, as its title suggests, music blog. In which they hire, yes, writers to write music reviews. Which is, you guessed it, what the reference is. Statυs (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC) What makes Video Static (ref 65) a reliable source? Giants2008 (Talk) 18:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Actually, I have no idea :S Although, it is there only to source the director of one of the music videos. Should I replace it? — ΛΧΣ21™ 19:17, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Video static gets all of their information directly from the production companies; if you see their sidebar, it shows their sponsors. It is a very commonly used source. Statυs (talk) 00:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC) The source being used often is not an indication of reliability. I'd be happier if this was replaced. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:35, 23 November 2012 (UTC) When did I state that? My second sentence states that it's a commonly used source. Please check out my first sentence. Statυs (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Image could use alt text. This one's still outstanding. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC) One was added 5 days ago: "A young man holding a microphone while being held in the forearm by an unknown person. He is wearing black pants, and a square-shaped botoned shirt, as well as a black hat." Statυs (talk) 15:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC) It's not showing up to the readers, though. I peeked at the formatting and noticed two Alt= parameters in the infobox. Maybe moving the alt text to the second parameter would get it to appear? Giants2008 (Talk) 18:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Removed. Alts never work on Google Chrome, so I never see them, so I didn't notice. Statυs (talk) 21:39, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

• Per talk page request, I'll leave a review for this list by tomorrow. Best, Jona^{talk to me} 16:15, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

  Jona has 20 days without editing Wikipedia, so I'm afraid he won't be able to review the list.... — ΛΧΣ21™ 17:52, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support: Artist hasn't been around for that long but has two of the highest selling singles of all time and a multi-platinum album, so is of high relevance. Plus this article is very organized and easy to navigate through. Great work guys! Arre 05:42, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks Arre! Statυs (talk) 13:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

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