Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/AC/DC discography/archive2

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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [1].

---

AC/DC discography

AC/DC discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/AC/DC discography/archive1
• Featured list candidates/AC/DC discography/archive2

Nominator(s): VAUGHAN J. (TALK) and shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 07:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

This is a list showing the discography of Australian rock band AC/DC. The list was created in 2006 by Gsmuk (inactive since 2012), expanded and first nominated for FLC in 2008 by No-Bullet (also inactive since 2012). The first FLC nomination ended up not promoting. 15 years later, me and shaidar cuebiyar have been working hard this past week, to make it look like the discographies that is currently an FL (e.g. Daft Punk's or Slipknot's). This is my first FLC nomination, so I can tell it can get a bit hectic at times, so all types of feedback are all welcome and very much appreciated. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 07:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude

Take 1

I will do a full review later (looks really good at a first glance, BTW!), but is it worth adding a footnote that, although "Highway to Hell" was released in 1979, its peak position in the UK of number 4 didn't occur until well over 30 years later, in 2013.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC) Hey ChrisTheDude! Thanks for coming in to check out the article to review it. Now, it's not really worth putting a footnote, mentioning the fact that the song peaked in the UK charts more than 30 years later. We're only leaving it the way it is, without a footnote, because that's the peak number that the song reached in the UK. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 09:17, 13 November 2023 (UTC) Welcome to this FLC. I agree with my co-nominator about minimising notes in the tables. The various tables would become cluttered with numerous such notes for various works e.g. Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap was issued in US in 1981 and charted there on the strength of Back in Black (1980). It entered the ARIA charts in Australia in 2008 but its peak in that year is lower than its spot on KMR in 1976. Such information is available at the album's article and rather too complex for a note per release. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC) Fair enough, it was just a thought....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC) Okay. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 10:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Take 2

"Bon Scott died" - per MOS:SURNAME, no need to repeat his forename – Done "In 50 years of their career, AC/DC sold" - have they retired/split up? If not then it should be "In 50 years of their career, AC/DC has/have (not sure which is correct in Aussie English) sold" – Done "Back in Black alone sold 25 million copies (50 million worldwide)" - which country/countries does that first figure relate to? – Done "Angus observed" - he should not be referred to by his forename alone. Normally just his surname would be used, but as there are multiple Youngs in the band, you will have to use his full name – Done I realise they are primarily an albums act, but there's literally not a single mention of their singles in the lead (other than the count in the first sentence). I feel that in the interest of completeness, the lead should at least say something about the singles element of their discography – Done

• That's it I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:51, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

  I have addressed these concerns (most are copy edits). For the singles I decided to tackle their popular singles per certifications. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:09, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

  One more comment following the above edits. In the lead you now have both "AC/DC has" and "AC/DC have". I honestly don't know whether in Australian English band names are treated as singular (like in the US) or plural (like in the UK) bit whichever it is it needs to be consistent..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:37, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

  You're quite correct, Australian English typically follows standard British usage and treats band names as plural. Notwithstanding this, I've left any "AC/DC has" that are part of titles in references. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for the support! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 21:19, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

  Cheers. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Image and source review

Image review and source review 1

Image review : Passed Image relevant Image appropriately licensed Suggest adding alt text – Done Source review 1 Version reviewed Fn 2 : link is dead – Done Fn 3 : no need to include location – Done Fn 6 : website says it is called LouderSound not TeamRock – Query Could be a recent name change? Check the archive-url, it says TeamRock. Should I change it to LouderSound? shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC) I changed the URL to be the updated version that has Power Up from Classic Rock. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 08:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC) Fn 13 : link to Time magazine – Done Fn 20: include language parameter – Done Fn 26-29, 33-40, et, all : why is the website listed as Electric Shock – Reply Again, this appears to be a name change. Check archive-url. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:17, 23 November 2023 (UTC) You can see it on the Aus version of High Voltage, so I'm changing it to ac-dc.net as the publisher just in case. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 08:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC) Fn 66: be consistent with writing titles and cases – Done Fn 67 : Billboard is not linked, while you have linked it in every other instance. As a matter of consistency, it should be linked in every instance, or only the first. – Done Fn 73 : missing work/website name – Done Fn 91 : doesn't have a publisher – Done Fn 116 : why is AC/DC in lower case? – Done Fn 125 : link Radioscope to t he chart Recorded Music NZ – Done What makes TechGeek.au a high-quality reliable source? – Removed What makes Noise11 a high-quality reliable source? – Changed I changed that ref to be from Triple M. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 08:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC) Noise11 is a website established by Paul Cashmere and his partner Roz Gorman in 2011, which replaced his previous website Undercover (established 1994). According to "Outa Site", Undercover did "an excellent job, generating more than a handful of local music news grabs a day." shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 07:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC) @Vaughan J.: Could you check the above. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 07:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Ping me once you have addressed above. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Pseud 14: I think everything has been addressed. There are some comments from shaidar cuebiyar mostly on the source review. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 08:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Well done, Vaughan J. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Source review 2 and spot checks

Source review 2 Version reviewed Fn 59 : Radioscope not linked (2 other instances are linked) – Done This was a problem with the Cite certification template. If you check its wikicode you'll see that RadioScope does not appear there and so cannot be wikilinked for this entry. I've replaced the Cite certificate 'plate with Cite web one. I've also changed RadioScope to RadioScope New Zealand.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC) Fn 63, 72 : Since you have done such a good job of italicizing album titles, this probably should be as well, and should be consistent throughout – Done Fn 76, 81 : AllMusic is italicized, while the rest aren't. Should be consistent. Suggest linking as you had done with other parameters. – Done I think I've got all these pesky mites. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 15:26, 23 November 2023 (UTC) Fn 104 : Author is Ellie Robinson – Done Spot checks Fn 4 : ok Fn 9 : ok Fn 13 : ok Fn 41 : can't seem to find any mention of diamond certification. How many units or times would it be platinum certified to achieve such in Canada? – Done I've added a note to the ref: User may have to click on numbers 2 or 3 (at bottom of listing) to access further information. As for Canadian diamond it equals 10× platinum, which for Back in Black is for more than 1,000,000 units. (Canadian ratings changed for albums released after May 2008). shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 15:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC) Fn 76 : ok Fn 91 : ok Fn 109 : ok Fn 127 : the video album doesn't seem to be listed as diamond certified – Done Fixed both urls, previous ones led to albums not video albums. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC) Fn 139 : - ok @Vaughan J.: Your turn. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC) I’ll get into it as soon as I have time, because of school. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 21:34, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok on the first pass. Taking a second look to make sure I don't miss anything and as a due diligence did spot checks for verifiability. Pseud 14 (talk) 14:42, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

@Pseud 14: I believe everything has been sorted out. Thanks for the review! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 21:58, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Seems like everything is in order. This passes source review. Pseud 14 (talk) 00:57, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Cheers. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Cheers! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 01:53, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

Reviewing prose. Hopefully this gets traction, and attracts more reviews needed to promote.

Prose review

I would remove (16 available worldwide and two issued only in Australasia), having the the parenthetical is a bit awkward and should be generally avoided, also since the information is readily available and identified in the table. – Done greatest hits-type packages -- I'd use greatest hits album or compilation album, as this is rather informal. – Done (which served as the soundtrack to Stephen King's film Maximum Overdrive) -- I'd remove the parentheses and replace it with a comma before and after. – Done Back in Black alone sold 25 million copies in the US (50 million worldwide), and went on to become the second highest-selling album in history.[8] -- I would move this and maybe tweak it, so that it follows the sentence discussing Back in Black for a much better flow. And maybe use either US sales or worldwide sales only. – Tweaked

• That's about all I got. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Pseud 14 Just saw this the day after you sent the review, but I pretty much got everything done. Thanks for taking this review! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 16:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

• Looks good. Support on prose. Good luck with this FLC! Pseud 14 (talk) 16:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  Cheers! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 23:57, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

• @Pseud 14: Thanks for your comments.
  • Well done, Vaughan J, I see this FLC's in safe hands.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

  Yep. Just maybe one or two more supports and we're all good to go! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 04:15, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

magiciandude

Ref issue

Thanks to the List of best-selling albums article, I've become a fan of Back in Black. That said, the source for Billboard doesn't state it is the 2nd best-selling album of all-time. It seems you are sourcing the article I mentioned, but we can't use Wikipedia as a source. You would have to find a source that explicitly calls it the 2nd best-selling album of all-time or re-write with whatever the source says. I'll take a look at the rest in the meantime. Erick (talk) 18:21, 11 February 2024 (UTC) After looking it over the list, that's the only issue I have the list. If you can address this, I will gladly support the list! Erick (talk) 20:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

@Vaughan J.: Just checking in to see if you saw my above message. Erick (talk) 18:08, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

@Magiciandude: Just saw it. Sorry for the wait, but I'll get into it soon. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 23:41, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

@Magiciandude: Just fixed the Billboard ref to a ref that mentions the 50 million copies. Thank you for the review! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 23:57, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Support per my only concern being addressed. Do you think you could review Latin Songwriters Hall of Fame in return? Erick (talk) 22:24, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I'll get onto it today or maybe tomorrow! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 05:24, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Status

@FLC director and delegates: Not to bother you guys, but I need a status update for this FLC. It's now been inactive for almost 2 months. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 00:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I concur on this request.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 04:34, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

There unfortunately has not been enough review to be comfortable promoting; additionally only one person has supported on a content review. --PresN 12:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@FLC director and delegates: After two more supports (which makes it 3 supports now), what's the status like now? — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 06:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Promoted. --PresN 03:21, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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