Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Michael Jackson albums discography/archive1
- 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) 00:27, 21 April 2022 (UTC) [1].[reply]
Michael Jackson albums discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): TheWikiholic (talk) 17:39, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating Michael Jackson albums discography for the featured list because it is sourced, well-organized, and easy to navigate through. I have spent quite some time expanding and cleaning up the article, which I now believe meets the featured list criteria. This is my second featured list nomination, and I look forward to the comments. Regards.— TheWikiholic (talk) 17:39, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Drive-by comment: Most album details appear to be unsourced (the chart histories may contain this info, but that is not clear at the moment), and the chart positions for the video albums are completely unsourced. Also, many sources have access dates from 2009 or 2010, so how can they cover albums released throughout the 2010s? Make sure access dates and archived pages reflect recent updates. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:49, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- RunningTiger123 I have reviewed and sampled many articles from Category:FL-Class Discography articles before nominating this article, and none of them were sourced as you say. They either use the sources part of chart history or the certifications. Here I've already added a source for the albums, even if it was not certified even though it has already charted. There were only seven releases since 2010 and that's why most of the sources have access dates prior to 2010.— TheWikiholic (talk) 04:13, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I know that older nominations don't have the same level of sourcing, but the three most recent discography promotions – Regine Velasquez discography, MewithoutYou discography, and Amy Grant discography – all provide sources for album details. Also, access dates and archived pages still need to be updated even if most of the cited information predates those; we need to source all of the information, not most of it. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:31, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Follow-up: I missed the part where you'd updated the sources – those generally look good now, though I haven't taken an in-depth look. Thanks for doing that! RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:33, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- RunningTiger123 I have reviewed and sampled many articles from Category:FL-Class Discography articles before nominating this article, and none of them were sourced as you say. They either use the sources part of chart history or the certifications. Here I've already added a source for the albums, even if it was not certified even though it has already charted. There were only seven releases since 2010 and that's why most of the sources have access dates prior to 2010.— TheWikiholic (talk) 04:13, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:53, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
;Initial comments
|
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead.
- Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes (which you have) lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! rowspan="2" style="width:13em;"| Title
becomes! rowspan="2" style="width:13em;" scope=col| Title
. Note that where you have double headers (e.g. Peak chart positions and also the individual countries) both column headers need the scope.
- Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. --PresN 21:35, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- PresN take a look now, please.— TheWikiholic (talk) 01:49, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @TheWikiholic: Ah, not quite- see my edit to the page. Both the "Peak chart positions" and all of the "US", etc. column headers need it too. I've done it for the first table as an example. --PresN 15:43, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- PresN Please see my latest edits and let me know if I missed anything. TheWikiholic (talk) 08:09, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @TheWikiholic: Ah, not quite- see my edit to the page. Both the "Peak chart positions" and all of the "US", etc. column headers need it too. I've done it for the first table as an example. --PresN 15:43, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- PresN take a look now, please.— TheWikiholic (talk) 01:49, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as I see no other lingering issues at all. TruthGuardians (talk) 02:01, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comments Support by Gerald Waldo Luis
[edit]Great to see this, as I'm a relatively new MJ fan ever since my brother got interested in his songs. This looks like massive amount of work, which I applaud, but of course at a cost of some flaws which I found. If they're all resolved I'll happily support this nom. GeraldWL 17:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from GeraldWL 16:19, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
* Why cant those links in the See also hatnote be moved to the See also section instead?
|
- Support. Sorry TheWikiholic for the delay; it looks all good for me now! GeraldWL 16:19, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from TRM
[edit]- I'm not convinced that Jackson released two posthumous albums, he wasn't alive to do that...
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comparable figures should be all numerals or all words (numbers of each type of album...)
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "later known as The Jacksons" for consistency, shouldn't that be "the Jacksons"?
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "still part of The Jackson 5" etc etc.
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "was certified Gold by the" you've mentioned "certification" before. so the link should be there and not on "Gold".
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- " on the Billboard Pop Albums Chart and " consistency needed on format of Billboard here. Check all others.
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 03:15, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "both the U.S. and the Australian ARIA charts" this implies that there are ARIA charts in the US.
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "U.S.’ best-selling album for two years" awkward, perhaps "best-selling album in the United States for two years"
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "The album's success set the standard for the music industry" what does that even mean? And the linked article relates to the success of the Thriller video an its impact, not the album per se.
- Fixed.TheWikiholic (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- What is ref 36 supposed to be saying?
- Reference 36 is supposed to say that the album was certified 8-time platinum by RIAA.
- You have "5 million" and "six million" in the same paragraph. Be consistent and compliant with MOS.
- Fixed.TheWikiholic (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "It has sold over six million copies" the source says "reportedly six million".
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "and The Essential Michael Jackson" why is "The" outside the link?!
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "until at least 2017" it's 2022, so what now?
- Fixed.TheWikiholic (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's the lead reviewed. Plenty to do here. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 10:39, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The Rambling Man Please have a look at my edits, and let me know if I missed something. TheWikiholic (talk) 18:27, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Kavyansh
[edit]- "Since his death, ... posthumously released" — doesn't these both mean same?
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "Jackson made his debut at the age of five" — which year? 1963?
- No, 1964. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "In the same year" — remove 'In'
- Done. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "was certified Gold" v. "was certified silver" — Is there a reason why 'G' is capitalized but 's' is not?
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "four years later in 1979" — In this particular case, I don't think mentioning year is important. We know 1975 + 4 = 1979
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "It influences artists" — Should be in past tense, I think
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "9× Platinum" v. "34× platinum" v. "11× platinum" v. "8× platinum" — check capitalization for all of these as well as others
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- "on the U.S. Billboard 200 chart" — Italicize Billboard?
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- A 5 paragraphed lead is bit too long. MOS:LEAD advises lead to be generally no longer than 4 paragraphs.
- Fixed. TheWikiholic (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- For all those empty cells, wouldn't it be better to just add a center aligned em-dash?
- Kavyansh.Singh I've referenced a few FL discographies, and none of them use center-aligned em-dash in empty cells like sales or certifications.— TheWikiholic (talk) 17:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Ref#8: needs en-dash instead of that hyphen
- Done.— TheWikiholic (talk) 17:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Ref#54: "Michael Jackson - Australian Albums Chart": needs en-dash instead of that hyphen
- Done.— TheWikiholic (talk) 17:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Check for same for all the references, like Ref#56, #57, #58, #59, #60, #68, etc. (Not a full source review)
– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:18, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Done.— TheWikiholic (talk) 17:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- All my comments are probably resolved. I'll check back later if I can support. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 06:50, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Done.— TheWikiholic (talk) 17:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 20:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.