Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Usher discography/archive1
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 by Dabomb87 17:34, 11 October 2010 [1].
Usher discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Featured list candidates/Usher discography/archive1
- Featured list candidates/Usher discography/archive2
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Rayman95 (talk) 16:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this article for featured list because I feel that it meets the featured list criteria. Rayman95 (talk) 16:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Oppose There are a few sources used in his album sales that I feel are inappropriate to use in an FLC.
- People.com as much as you may like it, is a tabloid magazine/website, which is not reliable for sales. You are using it for two things.
- Comment - People is not an unreliable source. –Chase (talk) 02:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment 2 It most certainly is unreliable. It is a tabloid magazine like it or not, therefore it is not reliable. For sales we can only use official sources like an official website, record label or industy related source. People fits none of the above mentioned criteria.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 04:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I also believe People is reliable, is a celebrity magazine not considered a tabloid like The National Enquirer or The Sun. It's published by Time Inc, which is part of Time Warner, it obviously have an editorial oversight and both the magazine and the publisher are notable and mentioned on other third party sources. Using the record label or the artist's website will be inapropiate since those are primary sources. Frcm1988 (talk) 06:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi there Frcm. I see what yoour saying, and I would agree to using it for maybe other things in a bio, but I just can't see using it for sales in a FL article.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 07:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- What exactly makes it an unreliable source for sales? –Chase (talk) 12:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi there Frcm. I see what yoour saying, and I would agree to using it for maybe other things in a bio, but I just can't see using it for sales in a FL article.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 07:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I also believe People is reliable, is a celebrity magazine not considered a tabloid like The National Enquirer or The Sun. It's published by Time Inc, which is part of Time Warner, it obviously have an editorial oversight and both the magazine and the publisher are notable and mentioned on other third party sources. Using the record label or the artist's website will be inapropiate since those are primary sources. Frcm1988 (talk) 06:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment 2 It most certainly is unreliable. It is a tabloid magazine like it or not, therefore it is not reliable. For sales we can only use official sources like an official website, record label or industy related source. People fits none of the above mentioned criteria.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 04:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - People is not an unreliable source. –Chase (talk) 02:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "Famouspeople.com" is not reliable. Firstly, it doesn't load at all for me, it comes up as a dead-link, secondly, I'm familiar with the source, and it is not reliable for FLC use.
- Usher world does not mention anything regarding the sales for "Here I stand"
- This is from a quick glance, so I suggest a thorough look at the sourcing etc.
- If this is fixed, and I find no more errors, I will be happy to support.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 16:35, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Taking more looks at the article, and what Lakeshade pointed out, this article is not in any way ready for FLC.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 07:03, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Oppose -
Refs:
- WP:OVERLINK left and right.
- Inconsistent datings, eg: August 15, 2010. and 2009-11-15. Choose one or the other.
- You use aCharts, this is not allowed per WP:CHARTSCHART. "Good and Featured class articles should not rely on unlicensed archives"
- No usage of "En-dash", your using simple "-" dash.
- WP:OR and WP:V issues. Music video sections parts are not sourced. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 03:53, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article:
- "Peak chart positions" under singles and "Peak chart positions" albums have different chartings. They need to be the same.
- Comment - WP:DISCOGSTYLE does not require this. –Chase (talk) 02:13, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "Peak chart positions" need to be in alphabetical order.
Lead:
- WP:ORDINAL violations.
- Prose is choppy and needs a copy edit.
- Comment—the links to compilations, My World, Poetic Justice, and Victory (album) lead to dab pages; no dead external links. Ucucha 23:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Oppose - Per everything CK Lakeshade said. No acharts, unsourced parts, WP:OR is in action, and prose is not of good quality. Candyo32 20:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose
- Lead is extremely too long.
- Peaks should be in alphabetical order.
- US should not have periods when being used with acronyms of other countries, per WP:MOS.
- Several music videos lacking sources, not to mention, music videos generally aren't from albums like singles are.
- aCharts generally should only be used as a convenience link - try a licensed archive.
–Chase (talk) 02:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.