Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Train 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 Giants2008 17:12, 2 October 2012 [1].

Train discography

Featured list candidates/Train discography/archive1

Nominator(s): Holiday56 (talk) 09:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because having done much work on the article, I feel the article is ready to be promoted to featured list status. Holiday56 (talk) 09:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 15:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Sufur222

Let's see:

"Hey, Soul Sister" and "Drive By" have both been certified gold in Germany, with "Hey, Soul Sister" also being certified gold in Switzerland.
- Added. Holiday56 (talk) 03:14, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"50 Ways to Say Goodbye" has been certified gold in America.
- Added. Holiday56 (talk) 03:14, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Was Live from Fantasy Studios not actually released via a label?
- It was an independent release. Holiday56 (talk) 03:14, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No image? If there isn't currently one in the Wikimedia Commons, then you might be able to find a free image at Flickr.
- Found a free image and uploaded it; added it to the article. Holiday56 (talk) 03:14, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Ref 58) CMT isn't a publication, so it shouldn't be in italics. Personally, I'd expand it out fully (to Country Music Television) but I'm not to hardline on this.
- Removed italics. Holiday56 (talk) 03:14, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And that's about it. If nothing else occurs to me, then I'll have no reservations supporting. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks great, again. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 15:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment very good.

"peaking at number 5 on" and "peaked at number 6 on the " etc, in these sentences with just a single numerical representation, you should be using text.
- Done. Holiday56 (talk) 09:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What does "N/A" mean in other artists in the other appearances table mean?
- "not applicable". It's used for appearances where no other performers are on the track; I utilized the "n/a" template. Holiday56 (talk) 09:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Then isn't "none" more appropriate? The Rambling Man (talk) 09:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Okay. Changed. Holiday56 (talk) 09:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 07:31, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 22:59, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Alt text needs to be added to the images, per WP:ALT, explaining the contents of the image
- Done. Holiday56 (talk) 09:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unlink studio albums per WP:OVERLINK
Same goes for live albums, video album, singles, music videos, promotional singles
- In the lead? I don't see them linked anywhere else in the article. Almost every featured discography I've seen links them in the lead. Holiday56 (talk) 09:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - See WP:OVERLINK. TBr and ley 14:06, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - In the past I've been told to link them in the lead, so this seems to be another case of conflicting advice. I, personally, do think the links can stay. In the context of the article – a list of music releases – linking of these terms can be relevant and convenient for readers who may not be familiar with these terms. In addition, it seems to be a standard to link these in the lead based on the examples of multiple featured lists. Holiday56 (talk) 15:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"A" → "A", etc. with notes per MOS:CAPS
- Done, I guess. The notes are already capitalized. Holiday56 (talk) 09:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't use double quotes in references, as per WP:MOS
- Could you kindly elaborate? Which references need fixing? Holiday56 (talk) 09:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ref. 44. TBr and ley 14:06, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. Holiday56 (talk) 15:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"none" → "N/A"
- I'm getting conflicting advice regarding this: The Rambling Man suggests using "none", while you suggest "N/A". I do have a personal preference for "N/A", though I'm more or less okay with either. Holiday56 (talk) 09:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - None can stay then. TBr and ley 14:06, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TBr and ley 02:24, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support TBr and ley 22:59, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

;Prose comment from Crisco 1492

Nothing about grammar, per se, but about style. The lede you have here is an exact summation of the charts below but doesn't analyse the discography at all. Any stylistic shifts? Changes in recording labels or partners? Scandals over plagiarism? Notable awards for the albums, like a Rolling Stone Best 500 of All Time? What's their signature song, if any? Stuff like that should go in the lede, in my opinion.

If you'd like a point of comparison on my suggested styling, see Chrisye discography or List of songs recorded by Chrisye. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:41, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd understand your point if it corresponded to the discography of a prolific artist, like The Beatles or the example you've given above, Chrisye. But Train aren't exactly the most acclaimed or prolific artists, so information like that would seem rather off in the article. In the case of this list, the lead summarizes the contents of the actual discography, such as single releases, charts and albums — in the vein of discographies of less prolific artists, many of which have become featured lists (see Rihanna discography, Birdman discography and Jordin Sparks discography). Holiday56 (talk) 08:52, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion it is because they are not as well known that a bit of context may be necessary. Right now it reads like a shopping list, essentially. If there have been no thematic or stylistic variations in this time, fine, but surely there is a song that they are recognised for above all others? Different producers, perhaps? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The lead's overall style, focusing more on the actual content of the article — release dates, charts, certifications, etc. — is being used by a large number of featured discographies, so I do think its use in discographies has been accepted as informative enough to use and an accurate representation of contents. For certain artists of a similar nature to Train, it may be rather hard to find information regarding topics such as stylistic shifts, scandals, etc. I've done as best as I can to address your comments — I've added some details regarding the band's work with a long-time producer of theirs, additional info on their long-time label, Columbia Records, and information on their Grammy Award win. With a rather mid-length lead, a direct read-out of the band's most successful singles would feel somewhat redundant; to make up for this, special emphasis has been given to their most well-known singles in the prose. Holiday56 (talk) 09:51, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That looks a bit better. However, you don't tell us who replaced O'Brien. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:12, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added. Holiday56 (talk) 13:37, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:48, 26 September 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.