Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Foo Fighters discography/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal 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 removed by Gimmetoo 14:00, 15 December 2012 [1].
Foo Fighters discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Featured list candidates/Foo Fighters discography/archive1
- Featured list candidates/Foo Fighters discography/archive2
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Notified: WikiProject Discographies
I am nominating this for featured list removal because... I almost fell out of my chair after seeing this mess of an article with the bronze star. The lead sentence should not be in bold, 'twenty three' should be hyphenated and 100 and 200 in Billboard charts should not be in italics. All I see is 'the band', 'the band', 'the band' repeating over and over. There is no-where near the required amount of referencing. The biggest killer is the state of the references, including inconsistencies with date formats (January 1, 2000 or 2000-01-01), incorrect works and publishers (billboard.com) and bare links for references 78-93. The album certifications use certifying bodies (ARIA) whereas the singles table uses the country's abbreviations (AUS). Till 08:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- "I almost fell out of my chair after seeing this mess of an article with the bronze star" - well that was unnecessary. This discography has been featured since before your account even existed, so obviously it isn't going to be meeting our frequently changing standards. Anyway...—indopug (talk) 15:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Replies and further comments
- The lead: yeah this needs a thorough copy-edit. Reads rather dully and repetitively.
- "no-where near the required amount of referencing" - where? In the lead? Not required, per WP:LEAD, as the chart numbers and certifications are covered by cites in the tables below. Of course, stuff in the lead that isn't supported by the tables will require refs (already in place).
- "inconsistencies with date formats" - done. (there are scripts for such things)
- "album certifications use..." - done.
- "incorrect works and publishers (billboard.com)" - done, I think.
- "bare links for references 78-93" - before we start filling these out: should we even be listing fan-made videos (no matter who paid for them) here?
- The tables have to be cross-checked with references for accuracy of the numbers. There's been a lot of moving around of charts of late.—indopug (talk) 15:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delist a quick look...
- Lead and infobox doesn't tally up.
- Album release dates - where are they referenced and for which specific territory are they relevant?
- Live albums has an incorrect caption.
- If Five Songs and a Cover didn't chart, where is its existence referenced?
- The "x" note needs a full stop.
- Notes should be referenced.
- Where are the promo singles that didn't chart anywhere referenced?
- Blank cell for the director of "Generator".
- Where is any of the "Other appearances" table referenced?
- Check that reference titles meet WP:DASH.
The Rambling Man (talk) 16:31, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note no traffic here for four weeks, suggest delisting is enacted. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:45, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.