Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Crystal Castles discography/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 Hey man im josh via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 16 August 2024 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Crystal Castles discography

edit

Crystal Castles discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Skyshiftertalk 01:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discography of the Canadian electronic duo Crystal Castles, which has quite a cult following. This is my first ever FLC, so I believe there will be some mistakes, but I'll do my best to address them in the course of this nomination. Skyshiftertalk 01:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose & images (relevant to text, captioned, properly licensed, alt text present). Well-written & comprehensible to me. Only thing - maybe elaborate a bit on the abuse allegations? I had to dig a little more to understand those and it left a little more to be desired. Otherwise, great work and well done! Staraction (talk | contribs) 03:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support! So that's the main thing I'm unsure about, considering WP:BLP and WP:UNDUE. I believe that it's relevant to cite the allegations, as that's why Glass left the band and why it is on hiatus. It's definitely important enough to be cited here. However, because of these policies I mentioned, I think going into detail would be too much. Skyshiftertalk 03:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

edit
  • It reads a bit weirdly to say things charted in "Scotland and the United Kingdom" given that Scotland is part of the UK. It would be like saying a song charted in "Texas and the United States". But I can't think of a way round this........
    • I'd say it makes sense, as Scotland and the UK have their respective national charts. I understand how it could be confusing, but like, it's not wrong..
  • "Crystal Castles later released a cover of that album's "Not in Love"" - it's not a cover because it was their own song to begin with. You can only cover someone else's song. "Re-recording" would be the appropriate description.
    • Fixed
  • "charting in multiple countries and being certified gold by Music Canada." => "which charted in multiple countries and was certified gold by Music Canada."
    • Fixed
  • "The band has been on hiatus since Glass' abuse allegations against Kath in 2017" - appreciate you don't want to elaborate on this but the choice of wording makes it sound like the allegations have already been mentioned when they haven't. Suggest changing to "The band has been on hiatus since Glass made allegations of abuse against Kath in 2017"
    • Fixed
  • That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TechnoSquirrel69

edit

One review coming up. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citation numbers from this revision. Let's do this!

  • Neither of the references after "... allegations of abuse against Kath in 2017." verify that the band is on hiatus.
    • Changed to "inactive", which I guess is factual due to the band not releasing or saying anything since then. Apparently there are no sources explicitly saying that the band has not done anything since then, which kinda sucks, because it is pretty obvious.
      Yeah, it can be hard to prove a negative with things like this. Good change; it addresses my concern. —TS
  • Might be worth a mention in the prose that the 2010 album was re-released as II and/or also known with the number in the title.
    • Done
    • Also, what a coincidence that I was listening to American Football, who also have multiple eponymous albums, while writing this up! —TS
      • Good taste!
  • What's the distinction being drawn between the "versus" remixes and the other ones? That stylization was used in electronic music circles back in the day to denote collaborations or remixes, but it doesn't seem to impart much information here.
    • I think it's valid to mention how they were credited when there's a difference. Not all of their remixes from that era are like this, such as "Atlantis to Interzone", which is just "Crystal Castles Remix".
  • Lists and tables are exempt from MOS:REPEATLINK, so I would encourage linking things like the singles and featured performers wherever they appear, which is generally considered beneficial for readers.
    • Done
  • Change the sub-sections in § Notes to use true headers per MOS:PSEUDOHEAD.
    • Done
  • In note (lowercase) a: Saying these singles are "sometimes referred to as EPs" is vague and opaque. Why is this the case? Which other songs featured on these EPs? Please add sources as necessary. It would also be nice to expand the initialism since we're in a footnote.
    • Added sources and information
  • Are the "To access ..." notes in citations 7 and 8 necessary? It's not exactly common practice to include navigational tips for the website in references.
  • Any reason why links to Ultratop are piped as "ultratop.be"?
    • Changed
  • I suppose the URLs are inevitable in citations 9 and 10, but "irishcharts.com" should be "irish-charts.com". I would also format them with the |website= parameter and add |publisher=Hung Medien.
    • Done
  • There seems to be more citations in title case than sentence case, so so I would make them all consistent to that. This script might be able to help.
    • Good script! But other than two sources that I had forgotten, I've already made them sentence case, and all of them should be now. You might be referring to things like "Official Scottish Singles Chart Top 100", but I'd say these are proper names.
  • In citation 19: remove the name of the website from the title.
    • Done
  • I don't think the exact stylization of the YouTube channel names are necessary, and would just format them with their proper names.
    • Done

That's all I've got for now; I might be back with more comments after another read through. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TechnoSquirrel69: All responded! Skyshiftertalk 19:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source review
edit

Now working from this revision.

  • No further suggestions on the citation formatting, and the sources are all reliable enough to verify their claims.
  • Assuming good faith for offline sources.
  • Since this is the nominator's first FLC, I conducted some spot-checks. Citations 1–5, 9, 10, 16, 19, and 55–57 revealed no issues.
  • Citation 18 doesn't verify the Flemish Heatseekers chart placement.
    • It's on the archive; set "url-status" to "dead".
  • Several links in citation 24, such as for "Air War" and "Courtship Dating" don't seem to verify their claims. "Baptism" is also listed with a peak at 87th, while the source claims 83rd.
    • I don't know why some of these links refer to 2002... I'll fix these links later. Corrected placement for "Baptism".
  • Citation 11 doesn't verify the chart placement of "Baptism".
    • Removed
  • "Sad Eyes" is listed at 139th, while citation 39 claims 89th.
    • Fixed

I plan to do a more in-depth check of the sources, but I will have to oppose at the moment. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added a bit more. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Responded; some changes pending. Skyshiftertalk 22:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoSquirrel69: all fixed. Skyshiftertalk 00:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seen; thanks! Oppose struck, but I will be doing another full pass of the article on account of the number of errors I identified the first time around. I'm sure you're doing so already, but I'd ask that you do the same to make sure there are no further hiccups in the review. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No further issues that I can find, so I'm going to go ahead and support conditional on the implementation of MPGuy's suggestions below. I would encourage another reviewer to check my work if they have the time to make sure nothing gets missed. Good luck with the rest of this candidacy, Skyshifter! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
  • Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes 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. ! Year becomes !scope=col | Year. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead. This is for the "Extended plays" and "Music videos" tables. Additionally, the "Peak chart positions" header cell (in quite a few of the tables) needs to have "colgroup" as its scope.
  • Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. Please ping me when you fix these issues. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:32, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MPGuy2824: done! Skyshiftertalk 18:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support promotion based on prose and table accessibility. If interest and time permit, please comment at my FL nom. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:29, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Crystal_Castles_discography/archive1&oldid=1240553560"