Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/System of a Down discography

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [1].

---

System of a Down discography

Nominator(s): Cannibaloki

I am nominating this for featured list because after putting it on a peer review with all concerns adressed, I think it is more prepared to meet the WP:FL?. Thanks in advance, Cannibaloki 03:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Support Looks good, and I'm happy to support. Great work! Drewcifer (talk) 00:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Cannibaloki 01:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Drewcifer

Comments Looks good, but I have the same old comments I usually make: Per MOS:DISCOG, 10 is the recommened limit for charts. Here you have 13. Done. "The discography of System of a Down" is a lame/boring way to start the list. We already know what the list is about from the title. Any suggestions? How about a general overview on the band? See Pendulum discography as an example. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC) The album column for the music videos is unnecessary. We already know that information from the singles table. Drewcifer (talk) 04:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Removed. Cannibaloki 05:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC) The lead needs citations, specifically for chart positions. And repeat what is already on the table? Yes. But basically the only thing you need source are the specific chart positions in the lead, since those are specific statistics, rather than broad notes that you'll go into more detail about in the tables anyways. Drewcifer (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Done. I'd recommend presenting chart numbers as "#37" not "number 37". Why? Just my own personal preference I suppose. Drewcifer (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Your vandal! "Gremlin"! Many of the similar columns aren't similar widths, mainly the detail columns. Drewcifer (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Done? Cannibaloki 20:43, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Why do we care how Hypnotize and Lonely charted in Finland? I mean, nothing wrong with Finland, but they charted better elsewhere. Why is Finland specifically relevant to mention here? They were better charted on two Billboard's component charts, already mentioned. Ok, fair enough. "numbers four and 16" should be "#4 and #16". The # to be consistent with everything else, and four shouldn't be spelled out since it's a statistic. Drewcifer (talk) 03:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Cannibaloki 17:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC) In the lead you've got "U.S." and the tables you've got "US". Stick with "US". The "U.S." of the text is based on this: "The United States of America (commonly referred to as the United States, the U.S., the USA, or America)..."; The "US" in the table is just an abbreviation. OK, I know what U.S. means, thanks. But U.S. and US are both abbreviations, so you should stay consistent whether or not your using it in prose or tables. They both refer to the same thing, so there is no reason for them to bifferent. Drewcifer (talk) 20:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Done. U.S. → US Cannibaloki 00:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Why were the Extended Plays and Other appearances removed from the article? From what I can see most other featured lists have them so I don't really see any reason to remove them, especially when they were sourced. Silver Sonic Shadow (talk) 23:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • What extended plays? If you're refering to Lonely Day, it is a maxi-single not EP.
  • The section Other appearances was added.

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead By the end of 1997 the group had signed to American Recordings, then distributed by Columbia Records. -- (1)Comma after 1997. (2)The by should be "as" Done. The following year they released their eponymous debut album, which peaked at number 124 on the U.S. Billboard 200 and number 103 on UK Albums Chart; Years later it was certified platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and gold by Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA). -- (1)Comma after following year (2)UK needs to be spelled out in its first occurrence (3)The Years later should be de-capitalized. Done. The follow-up, Toxicity (2001), topped the U.S. and Canadian charts and also reached the top 10 in Australia, Finland, and New Zealand. -- Comma after and. Done. The album was certified triple platinum in its home country, as well as double platinum in Australia and Canada. -- (1)the last part should be "as well as double platinum in Australia by the _____(industry) and the (acronym) in Canada." Done. Toxicity produced singles for the title track, "Chop Suey!", and "Aerials". -- Remove the comma after "Chop Suey!" Done. This album's first single "B.Y.O.B.", peaked at number 27 on the Billboard Hot 100, and number 26 on the UK Singles Chart. -- Remove both commas. Done. The follow-up "Question!", reached top 40 in the Ireland and United Kingdom charts. -- Comma before "Question!" and add "the" before top 40. Done. Also, they are the first band since The Beatles to get a pair of chart topping debuts in the U.S. within the same calendar year. -- Reword the beginning to "They are also the first band since..." [its improper to begin a sentence with Also] Done. In 2006, the group went on a hiatus and since then, all members have begun work on side projects. -- Comma before and since then. Done. Tables Check out fine. References If you are going to link some of the publishers, you may as well link the rest of them, like Allmusic and MTV.--TRUCO 01:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Take a look in everything (again), please. Cannibaloki 04:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Followup comments Lead The following year, they released their eponymous debut album, which peaked at number 124 in the United States' Billboard 200 and number 103 on the United Kingdom's Album Chart; years later it was certified platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and gold by Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA). -- I reworded this a bit, but the end needs to be reworded as "; it was certified platinum ___(# of years) years later by the...." Reworded. It produced two singles, the title track and "Lonely Day", which reached numbers 4 and 16 in the Finnish chart, respectively. -- The formatting of the integers should be consistent, per MOS:NUM numbers usually under 9 need to be spelled out (in this case). Reworded. References Allmusic should be linked in the general references. Done. If you want to avoid overlinking, only link the publishers the first time they appear within this section. Done. Remove the link in Ref 16 since other publishers that don't have articles aren't linked.--TRUCO 22:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Cannibaloki 00:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.TRUCO 21:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "at #124 in the United States' Billboard 200" "in"-->on "which reached top 30" Add "the" before "top". "The follow-up"-->Their follow-up album, "reaching only the top 20 in the U.S. and Australia."-->reaching the top 20 in only the U.S. and Australia. "UK Singles Chart.[3][2]" Put the inline citations in numerical order. "They are also the first band since"-->System of a Down is the first band since "to get a pair of chart topping debuts"-->to release two chart-topping debuts "within the same calendar year"-->in the same year "reached numbers four and 16" Write the numbers the same way. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC) All done! Cannibaloki 17:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

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