Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Billboard number-one country songs of 2020/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) 00:26, 25 January 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Billboard number-one country songs of 2020

Featured list candidates/List of Billboard number-one country songs of 2020/archive1

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk), Ss112 (talk), DanTheMusicMan2 (talk) 08:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I figure everyone is probably bored by now of me nominating lists of old country songs, so I thought I would do something radically different and nominate.......a list of new country songs!!!!! This year has been quite interesting because the record for the longest-running number one on the Hot Country Songs chart by a solo female vocalist has actually been broken not once but twice. I have listed Ss112 and DanTheMusicMan2 as co-noms as they are also significant contributors....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Alexandra

There are more than two people in the lead picture - I'm assuming Shelton is the prominent guitarist and not the drummer (or the halfway off-screen bass player...), but might still be best to append (left) and (right) after Shelton and Stefani's names
Would strongly recommend avoiding "female" as a noun when referring to people - the longest-lasting number one by a solo female → ...by a solo female artist
The picture of Morris does not have any alt text
Looks good otherwise. Please ping me when you have addressed the above!--Alexandra^IDV 10:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexandra IDV: - all done, although I put (second left) against Shelton in the image caption, as strictly speaking he is (do you know, until you pointed it out I hadn't even noticed that other guy was there :-) )...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thank you very much!--Alexandra^IDV 10:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Alexandra^IDV 10:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Ojorojo

It might be my system, but I had some problems trying to get the ref columns in the table to sort properly. With the different formats used for the citations, I'm not sure that this can be actually meaningful – tables often use class=unsortable for refs. Otherwise, looks good. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- @Ojorojo: - I made the ref column unsortable. Not sure why it was sortable in the first place, I never normally make ref columns sortable....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:03, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice work as always. —Ojorojo (talk) 19:39, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Everything looks great. It was a bit jarring jumping from the 1940s to 2020, who would've guessed that Justin Bieber would be on it? ~ HAL333 02:23, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @HAL333: - that's nothing, last year Marshmello had a country number one. I don't know what someone like Waylon Jennings would have said about a bloke with a white bucket on his head topping the chart, but I suspect it would have been.......colourful ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:34, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Link "charts".
"States, published by " -> "States and is published" otherwise it sounds like the records are published by Billboard.
"songs at number one that started their runs in 2019" not keen on "runs", maybe "songs that were number one in the last chart of 2019" or similar.
Luke Combs is overlinked in the lead.
""10,000 Hours" spent its 15th " maybe "went on to spend"?
"dethroned" sounds a bit tabloidy.
"The song ultimately extended the record to 19 weeks atop the chart" confusing use of song/record, and I would rephrase to just say it ended up remaining at number one for 19 weeks, the "extended the record" bit is unnecessary given the previous sentence.
Billboard is not consistently linked in the references.
Are you linking all websites/publishers? If so, why not ABC News (for example)?
Ref 17 is BBC News.

That's all I have. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:41, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: all done (I think) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: can you confirm if everything has been addressed to your satisfaction.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris, sorry for not getting back to you. One thing I've just noticed is the row scopes, and I guess this may impact your other lists if you decide to implement it. I think the scope should be the item of interest in the row, i.e. in this case the actual number one country song for each week, not the week itself. MOS:DTT shows several examples where years are actually the second column to ensure the scope is on the significant item. What do you think? |The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:40, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here, I found the W3C guidelines, note the table at the bottom where the player name is the scope, not the enumeration. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:43, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So how would that work in this case, where there are two number ones each week, one for each chart? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. I wonder if RexxS could offer any suggestions here? The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man and ChrisTheDude: where you have effectively two lists running together on the same timeline, you will want to try to find something that is unique to each row and common to both lists. The only thing you have in this case is the date and that becomes your best choice for the row header. If you think about what a screen reader would hear when navigating down a column, then they would be able to identify which row they were on by the issue date.

If you were considering two separate lists, then each title would certainly be the most important item and there would be a case for using them as row headers, although using the date would work as well because they are unique to each row. Hope that makes sense. --RexxS (talk) 14:10, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks RexxS. In that case I'm happy to support the nomination. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review – Pass

Pass – I see no issues in reliabillity or formatting. Aza24 (talk) 00:35, 19 January 2021 (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) 23:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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