Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Most Played Juke Box Race Records number ones of 1946/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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 25 March 2022 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Most Played Juke Box Race Records number ones of 1946 edit

Featured list candidates/List of Most Played Juke Box Race Records number ones of 1946/archive1

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the latest of my US number one songs lists, covering a year in the life of what is now the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart - 75 years before the chart was topped by the likes of Lil Nas X and Drake, the longest uninterrupted run of the year at number one was by a guy playing the vibraphone. That's the evolution of popular music for you...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB) edit

Missing caption, you know the drill. --Pres N 19:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bloody hell!!

Now sorted :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment(s) from Maile66 edit

Notes section a. - Might be good to add a citation for "a time when Billboard published only one R&B chart" . — Maile (talk) 23:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Maile66: - done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kavyansh edit

Image review

Image licencing looks good. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 20:46, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Joel Whitburn's Top R & B Singles, 1942-1995 — the hyphen needs to be en-dash
Top R&B/Hip-Hop Singles: 1942-2004. — the hyphen (between years) needs to be en-dash.
Ref#4, #6, #8, #61 are the same book. They need to be merged. Use either {{Sfn}} or {{Rp}} for page numbers
Suggesting to hyphenate ISBNs using this tool.

– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 06:37, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pass for source review – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

""Race records" was a term" — try not to start a sentence by a quote
"group the Ink Spots" — I think 'T' should be capitalized
Maybe add a short description for the article.

That is it! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 06:37, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kavyansh.Singh: - all done except:

I don't know what a "short description" is, can you advise?

Per MOS:THEBAND, when a band name starting with "the" is used mid-sentence, the T should not be capitalised -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I did the short description thing. Happy to support – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support All looks good. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:41, 5 March 2022 (UTC)Ojorojo[reply]

Support from Aoba47 edit

This is not necessary for the FLC, but I would encourage you to archive your web citations to avoid any future headaches with link rot and death.
I am not the best editor when it comes to images so take this with an entire mountain of salt. The source links for File:Lionel Hampton.JPG are no longer active. They were tied to an eBay entry so it is likely the product was either sold or the seller pulled it from their account so it is no longer available through the links. I just wanted to bring this to your attention.
For this part, The record would also be equalled by Drake in 2016, shouldn't Drake's song be named since both "Choo Choo Ch'Boogie" and "Old Town Road" are named in the prose?
I would link R&B in this part, the magazine's multimetric R&B chart, as I believe it would be beneficial to readers. It would also be consistent with another music genre (i.e. rock and roll) getting a link in the lead.
For the Billboard citations, I would include more information, specifically the volume and issue number and the ISSN. Apologies in advance as I know it is a pain to go back through all the citations for this, but I think it is important to include all the information here.

Wonderful work with the list as always. My comments are relatively minor, and once they are all addressed, I will be more than happy to support this FLC. I hope you are having a wonderful start to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 04:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: all done apart from the last one. Can you advise what parameters to use for the volume and issue numbers? I can't figure it out. There is no "issue" parameter........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:58, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: Thank you for addressing everything so far. Instead of using the cite book template, I would use the cite journal template for magazines as it has the parameters for volume and issues numbers as well as ISSN. I hope that clears it up, but let me know if you have any further questions about this. Thank you again. Aoba47 (talk) 20:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can also try {{Cite magazine}} for magazine. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 20:51, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: - done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: Thank you for the update. I think either the magazine or journal templates would be appropriate in this case. The list looks great to me, and I support it for promotion. If you have the time or interest, I would greatly appreciate any help with my current FAC about a much more modern piece of R&B music. Either way, have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 23:51, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting. --Pres N 00:37, 24 March 2022 (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.

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