Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Billboard Latin Music Award for Hot Latin Song of the Year/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 via FACBot (talk) 00:31, 4 June 2018 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Billboard Latin Music Award for Hot Latin Song of the Year edit

Featured list candidates/Billboard Latin Music Award for Hot Latin Song of the Year/archive1

Nominator(s): Brankestein (talk) 03:57, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I think that the Billboard Latin Music Award for Hot Latin Songs is an important recognition for Spanish-language hits in the United States. Brankestein (talk) 03:57, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from – jona ✉ 17:23, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

;Comments by AJona1992

Why isn't Latin music, radio airplay, streaming, and digital (music downloads), not linked?
"performers of the best performing" – needs variety
"when it started to also measure" – awkward English
"From 1995 to 1998, each music genre's field (Pop, Tropical/Salsa and Regional Mexican) had their own Hot Latin Track of the Year category" – why aren't they linked to their respective articles?
"Both artists are also the only ones to have received more than one award." – the prose could be improved
You've mentioned Enrique Iglesias already; Iglesias would suffice in subsequent mentions.
"Nominations were not present prior to 1999" – another example of weak prose.
Should artists be linked more than once in the table?
Is it really necessary to add all artists who have received an award be mentioned in the "records" subsection? – jona ✉ 21:55, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@AJona1992: Thanks for your comments! I edited the page following your suggestions. It should be better now. Brankestein (talk) 22:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"songs" is mentioned three times in a single sentence
I actually meant that the pop, tropical/salsa, and regional Mexican fields should have been linked with their corresponding award articles, though on further investigation, they do not exist which is probably why you did not link them. But on further thought, it is best to still have the genre's link for readers uninformed on the diversity of Latin music, so no changes there. – jona ✉ 19:01, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I suppose the "songs" repetition is better now. Brankestein (talk) 23:38, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support now that my comments have been resolved. – jona ✉ 17:23, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Courcelles (talk) 16:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Don't be afraid of redlinks. I know there aren't articles for several of the awards shows, but there likely should be, which makes redlinks acceptable.

"The award is given to the best performing singles' acts" Clunky, leaves open for interpretation rather this is awarded for "singles" in the record sense, or "singles" in the solo act sense.
In the infobox, 2015 is not current.
Is this a judged award at all? Or based purely on sales/airplay? Then wouldn't the winners be actually known ahead of time?

Courcelles (talk) 01:08, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. According to the Billboard Music Awards website, "finalists are based on key interactions with music fans, as well as album and digital songs sales, radio airplay, streaming, touring and social engagement." I couldn't find anything about how the winners are chosen. I thought the awards were given according to Billboard's year-end charts, but in 2017 those measured data from December 3, 2016 to November 25, 2017, while the 2018 awards measured data from February 4, 2017 to January 27, 2018. Despite that, in 2007 the Hot Latin Song of the Year (for the 2006 period) was Mariano Barba's "Aliado del Tiempo", which ranked at number four on the 2006 Hot Latin Songs year-end chart. The same goes for Tito El Bambino's "El Amor", which won the award in 2010 despite not having ranked within the chart's top 100 best-performing songs of 2009. Also, Don Omar won in 2012 for "Taboo" (number two on 2011's year-end) and Michel Telo in 2013 for "Ai Se Eu Te Pego" (number five on 2012's year-end), so I don't know how the winners are chosen. Brankestein (talk) 14:07, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'd still like to see all the years' ceremonies redlinked, but that's not enough to withhold support for. Courcelles (talk) 16:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm seeing a couple violations of MOS:ALLCAPS in the references.
Some references give the publisher by their name (I.e Billboard and Telemundo), while others give the base url (i.e axs.com and billboardevents.com). Try and keep it consistent.

That's all I found. Freikorp (talk) 11:11, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Brankestein: The comments from Freikorp have been up for a while, and it's unclear if you addressed all of Courcelles comments beyond the final question. Are you still working on this list? --Pres N 19:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I did not see those comments on my notifications. I have edited the article following the user's suggestions. Brankestein (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support this now. Don't feel obligated but I'm looking for comments on my FLC. Freikorp (talk) 23:08, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 14:15, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Is there a reason that " (Pop, Tropical/Salsa ..." pop, tropical and salsa are capitalised here and in the table?
Alejandro Fernandez has a diacritic missing.
" The current holders as of the 2018" you don't need both, stick with "as of 2018, the holder..."
"[6][7][8]" why aren't those in the Ref column?
Image captions which are fragments should not use a full stop.
Several song titles (e.g. "No Me Doy Por Vencido", "Livin' La Vida Loca") have capitalisation issues.
Tal Vez is piped to a redirect.
"Juan Magan " diacritic please.
Award ceremonies without articles should be linked, even though they'll be red.
Avoid SHOUTING in the ref titles.

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article was edited following your comments. Thanks for your suggestions! Brankestein (talk) 00:25, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source review – The references for this article all appear to be reliable, and spot-checks of refs 5, 12, and 13 show no verifiability concerns. I did find a few items worth commenting on, though:

Reference 28 (AXS) is showing up in orange on the link-checker tool, which means it may be dead. Please check it to see if it's still working. If not, try looking on the Internet Archive for an archived version or find a replacement for it if no archive exists of the page. The rest of the links check out fine.
The page number for ref 5 is LM-8, not LM-52 as the cite says. I think this was meant to give the total number of pages to that point, but this is an incorrect citation method. We should be using the page number of the given section, not some total that doesn't actually help the reader find the page in the most direct way.
~~Minor, but the hyphen in ref 29's title should be turned into an en dash for style purposes.~~ Giants2008 (Talk) 20:17, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I edited the page number for ref 5 and added an en dash in ref 29. The link for ref 28 is still working. Brankestein (talk) 22:46, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes look good. With everything resolved, I consider this source review a pass. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:13, 31 May 2018 (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. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:02, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.