Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of best-selling albums worldwide/archive1

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

The list was not promoted 04:02, 8 April 2008.

List of best-selling albums worldwide

[edit]

An extensive list of sales, EVERY claim is sourced. There are no tags requiring citations although there is one dubious tag. Despite this one dubious tag there doesnt seem to bee too much controversy surrounding it as it hasnt sparked too much debate on the talk page. The article is stable as a result of the semi protection i requested. Realist2 (talk) 01:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Definitely a good start, but there's a couple somewhat major issues I see:

Resolved stuff from Drewcifer
  • Even though it's mentioned in the lead that the numbers are in the millions, that should still be mentioned in the Sales column, perhaps in the header with something like "Sales (mil.)" or something like that. (DONE)
  • Multiple artists are typically written with a "/" in between, except Elton John and Hans Zimmer. (DONE)
  • I don't think the long section headers are necessary. I'm sure there some way to reword them so they aren't so long. (DONE)
  • The sound of music entry says "Julie Andrews ao". (DONE)
  • I'm also not sure why its necessary to flag double albums. It's double the music, but it's still sold as one package. (DONE)
  • The order of the last three sections should go See also, References, External links. (DONE)
  • I'd also recommend centering the Year columns. (DONE)
  • The lead doesn't summarize the article (as per WP:Lead). Instead, it goes right into talking about how unreliable and incomplete the list is. Mentioning why the list might not be complete/official is fine, but I don't think you should do so right off the bat. Introduce the list, summarize the main points, then talk about how it might be incomplete/inaccurate. (DONE)
  • All 82 of the citations have numerous formatting/MOS problems. Mainly they don't give proper attribution, only the title of the page. I would recommend using WP:Citation templates, since they do all the work for you. Also, I would recommend putting all of the citations into their own column at the far right.
  • The column widths should ideally be kept consistent throughout the article. (DONE)
  • Many of the tables are inconsistent with each other. 40-50 and 15-20 say "Year of release" while the others say "Released". (DONE)

    • That's about it for now. There's still a few more minor things I've noticed, but I'll stop here to avoid piling it on. Drewcifer (talk) 05:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I have done most of then now. I cant format sources however. I need help on that. Realist2 (talk) 12:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Good work so far. I've hidden the comments you've addressed, but some of the ones you've labeled as done still need some work. The lead still doesn't sumamarize the list. It's longer, but it doesn't say which album is the best-selling, how many albums there are total, etc. As for the citations, I'd usually offer to do them myself, but 82 references is alot. Again, I'd recommend using WP:Citation templates, since it's just a mtter of plugging in the information: the template does all the formatting for you. Also, the column widths still appear inconcistent to me. Also, the Year columns are still inconsistent. Some say "Release" some say "Released". Drewcifer (talk) 16:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
    • Col widths still not consistent on my browser (Safari).
    • Ref 8 is "dubious" - must be fixed for FL.
    • Remove spaces between citations and text per WP:CITE, or even consider a references column.
    • Every claim is cited, so what about "Additionally fans, record companies and the media are prone to exaggerating sales figures to boost the image of the relevant act."? sounds like WP:OR to me...
    • Talk about Thriller in the lead as it's miles ahead of anyone else. Plus presumably its recent re-release will have boosted sales further?
    • Should Alanis Morissette really order by A or M?
    • References should use the {{cite web}} template.
    • Three non-functioning links when I tried to use this.

    So oppose for now. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Is there a GOOD list candidates page , maybe i applied at the wrong place, i only wanted to get it up to the equivalent of GA. I was redirected to you guys by a fellow wiki.... lol....Realist2 (talk) 12:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Not specifically but no reason why it shouldn't qualify for WP:GAN... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Na you cant do lists there. Realist2 (talk) 14:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Feel free to remove this article if you dont think it comes close to reaching FA, I cant resolve the issue of formatting citations.Realist2 (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    What exactly do you wish to do with formatting citations? I'm Mr Citation by the way! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    These wierd {{cite web}} template things need using. I cant do it. Realist2 (talk) 19:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • Here, see this diff which shows me converting one of the references into a Cite web. Once you get the hang of it, it's really straight forward. You need to fill in, as a minimum, the url, title and accessdate parameters (although there are many other parameters you can use as well). Hope that helps. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose as the sources are inadequate.
    • Drop "based solely on claims made by reliable sources such as newspapers, record companies and documented sales certifications". It is up to you as editor to use reliable sources. The reader should take that for granted.
    • "Groupings are based on different sales benchmarks." Not sure what you mean by "benchmarks" but the section grouping is so obvious (if arbitrary) that you don't need to mention it.
    • You need to state your inclusion criteria. For example, "every album with more than 15 million sales worldwide". You don't need to say "irrelevant of language, age or genre".
    • "Claims of " Drop the "claims" from the section headings. If you don't think the claims are reliable, don't include them. If there are albums in the list with unreliable claims or unreliable sources, move them to the talk page so that you and other editors can collaborate on finding reliable sources for them.
    • A featured list is expected to be comprehensive. Therefore if some of your entries are removed from the list due to inadequate sourcing, you need to fix that. Similarly, if someone is able to find an album you have not included, then its comprehensiveness is in doubt. Clearly, if you can find one or two good sources that list all these bestsellers then that would help.
    • Don't know why Michael Jackson needs five citations. Just pick one good one.
    • Quite a number of your references are personal home pages, amateur fan sites, amateur music sites, forums and blogs. (e.g., this is a forum and totally unreliable.) For such best selling albums, you should be able to find the info on quality news sites (in the UK, the bbc news site and the guardian newspaper are good for searching), official band sites and quality music sites. Have a look on the Wikipedia article for each album/band and see if you can find a better source from one on that page. Colin°Talk 11:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_best-selling_albums_worldwide/archive1&oldid=1126717732"