Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Wilco discography
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. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 12 days, 4 support, 0 oppose. Promote. Tompw (talk) (review) 17:37, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
| Current Vote | User |
|---|---|
| Support | Circeus |
| Support | Geraldk |
| Support | Tompw |
As I wait for my FAC and my FPoC to get noticed, I figured, "why not a featured list candidate too?" I've tried to stay consistent with the other featured discographies. Let me know what you guys think. Teemu08 05:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
opposeI really don't think the whole 3-way split between "official material", "miscellaneous" and "Videography" is needed.- Fixed Teemu08
Might as well add a small Chart listing for the singles.- Fixed Teemu08
"by Wilco or any related bands." doesn't make any as the list doesn't seem to include material by "related bands" in the first place.- Fixed Teemu08
Either don't put links at all for A Ghost Is Born Bonus EP and Sky Blue Sky EP or create articles for them. (I'd personally favor the latter option.)- Fixed Teemu08
As far as I can see, only Jeff Tweedy discography is pertinent to this particular article. The rest of "See also" is either not linked to the discography itself, or mentioned in the lead.
- Circeus 01:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Might go through our 3 featured dicog at some point and removed the duplicating A-side links, but it's certainly not something to oppose for. Can't seem to find anything more to nitpick over,but then it's past midnight.
Tentative support. Circeus 04:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply] re-oppose- The New Zealand ref still links to Sophie Ellix-Bextor results.
- Consider switching the Sweden, Norway And Belgium charts for more relevant countries (e.g. Australia, Ireland, Germany, France).At least include one extra English-language country.
- Circeus 18:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed, and switched Sweden to Australia and Belgium to Ireland. Teemu08 20:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Might go through our 3 featured dicog at some point and removed the duplicating A-side links, but it's certainly not something to oppose for. Can't seem to find anything more to nitpick over,but then it's past midnight.
- I think we should replace the "Year" column with a "Date" column and drop the "Release date: ...", to make the tables more compact. I also think we should split the "Sales and certifications" column into two columns. The "Collaborations" sections could be converted to use a "Chart positions" section as well, for consistency with "Albums". (I already removed the explicit width on one of the tables, because the widths were very screen size dependent.) Anyone object to these changes? --PEJL 10:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I just noticed that the years and dates are inconsistent. Perhaps the years intend to refer to the recording date. Both (if they are to be separate) should refer to the release IMO. --PEJL 22:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed one date that I mistakenly forgot to fix, but where else do you see it? Teemu08 23:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A.M. --PEJL 23:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Apparently I need to get my eyes checked. Fixed. Teemu08 05:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A.M. --PEJL 23:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed one date that I mistakenly forgot to fix, but where else do you see it? Teemu08 23:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you think about replacing the "Year" column with a date column? Besides making the table smaller, it will also simplify the table, as it removes some redundancy (and ambiguity, in that a reader might think the years and dates refer to different things). I just did this, and also moved the formats into their own column. The result is a table that is about 20% wider, but less than half as tall. --PEJL 09:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I just noticed that the years and dates are inconsistent. Perhaps the years intend to refer to the recording date. Both (if they are to be separate) should refer to the release IMO. --PEJL 22:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- support. All my concerns have been addressed. Circeus 16:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Tompw (talk) (review) 17:35, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]