Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Lostprophets discography/archive4

< 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 Matthewedwards 01:50, 24 August 2009 [1].

Lostprophets discography edit

Nominator(s): Mister sparky (talk) 16:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because i believe that it's a good representation of the bands work, the article had some problems before and i feel that they have been addressed. Mister sparky (talk) 16:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support All of my concerns have been addressed, and I'm happy to support. Excellent work! Drewcifer (talk) 22:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Drewcifer

Comments I see this is the 4th attempt, hopefully this is the one! It looks like the list has indeed been improved with each FLC, but I still see some problems I'd like to see addressed:

  • The dates are in American form (Month Day Year), but since the band is Welsh they should be in international form (Day Month Year).
  • Some general references would be helpful. Again, you could look at the NIN discog for an example.
  • There's no need for a line break with the citation for directors; there's plenty of space on the same line. Drewcifer (talk) 00:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The band were established in 1997 in the Welsh town of Pontypridd" This fact is repeated twice.
  • UK should be spelled out the first time it's mentioned.
  • There's some broken references now. Drewcifer (talk) 00:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first column ommits formats, while the second includes them. Use one or the other, not both. Same thing with release dates: the first table includes it, the second ommits it.
Why did you loose the table? That's not what I suggested at all. Am I missing something? Drewcifer (talk) 00:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i removed the ep table until i could find reliable enough refs, then i'll re-instate it. and haha oops! fixed the broke refs Mister sparky (talk) 05:29, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well unfortunately, I don't think it's that easy. If the lostprophets released EPs, they should be included in the discography. So if they're not there, the list is incomplete, and so it would fail the FL criteria. Drewcifer (talk) 05:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
re-instated the ep table with the info i could find from a ref recommended on this very page. Mister sparky (talk) 11:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure where someone recommended MusicBrainz, but it's definitely not reliable, since it's user-editable. Therefore it can't be used for information-verification, ie, references. You could get away with using as an external link, but not as a reference. Definitely need to find something else. Drewcifer (talk) 03:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
as discussed elsewhere the table has been removed, so not relevant now. Mister sparky (talk) 21:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed how the MTV music video reference doesn't actually cover all of the music videos, just Rooftops. So obviously this doesn't work where it's placed, since it implies the same source for all of the directors. As it stands only one of the directors is referenced. Drewcifer (talk) 03:26, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Mister sparky (talk) 21:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

  • I'm not sure about the removing of the EP section. If they released it, then it's part of the discography. Though I understand that desire to take it out as well. If you can find some reliable sources that confirm their existence, I would recommend putting them back in, but I'll let that slide for the purposes of this FLC.
  • reliable sources cannot be found to prove their actual existance, so they were probably just leaked demo's. hence their removal. Mister sparky (talk) 11:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • MVDbase is not considered reliable, so you'll have to replace that one.
  • wasn't sure about that one myself actually, removed now. Mister sparky (talk) 11:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref #8 and #9 need publisher values.
  • No need to wikilink CD and digital download after the first time.
  • The dates still need to be changed to international format. Maybe you can scam Kiac into fixing them back? =) Drewcifer (talk) 23:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support from k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 14:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much! was much more work than i had originally thought but thank you for your help :) Mister sparky (talk) 15:14, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Kiac

Comments - I apologise if I've repeated anything, just ignore it and reply to previous reveiwer comments if that's the case. Sources/References

  • Wikilink Allmusic
  • The RIAA reference (#15) is missing a publisher.
It has been removed, all good.
  • Add general references to their discography on the official website, Rolling Stone and Allmusic. Then add an External Link to Musicbrainz. This should cover the release dates, etc.
  • Torrentz reliable as a source? What makes these three releases notable for inclusion? How are they official releases? If they're only available on Torrents sites, were they ever actually publicly released, or just leaked by the band?
  • have removed the ep table until a more reliable ref can be found. Mister sparky (talk) 17:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They all seem to just be demos, referred to here that way anyway. In this case - and if they were never officially released, then they don't really fit criteria for inclusion. This is a touchy one though, could just be that they were so small as a band at the time, that there's been no coverage of the releases. I see you've used Musicbrainz, I don't believe that is reliable as it is open source (user-submitted), just like Wikipedia.
okay i'm confused now! at the top of the page the advice was they have to be included, you say they dont. which is correct? and why recommend an external link to a site that you think is unreliable? doesnt make sense to me lol. Mister sparky (talk) 23:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know, it's confusing! I'll clarify - Musicbrainz and Discogs are user-submitted, so they are not reliable sources - but they are useful as External Links, because they cover similar information, etc.
as discussed elsewhere table has not been removed so not relevant anymore. Mister sparky (talk) 21:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other

  • The Certifications column shouldn't be split.
  • I don't think the é in debut is necessary. It's more common to spell without.
  • You refer to the band as "are", plural - then you refer to them as "its", shouldn't this be "Since their formation"?

More comments

  • Acharts has dubious methodology and fails to name some of its sources - thus it is discouraged. Use Charts.org.nz.
  • Hot Modern Rock Tracks|US Mod → Alternative Songs|US Alt.
  • RIANZ → Recording Industry Association of New Zealand
  • rowspan="1" should be removed, does nothing.
There's some other issues too, I'll be back tomorrow to try nut some of them out myself. All replied by k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 15:34, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • For some reason everything below the references section is tiny, can't see any coding error though.
  • 3 BPI website links are dead. See here and here
  • will remove the uk certs until the bpi website is back online then i'll re-instate them. Mister sparky (talk) 15:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

okay confused again! a few days ago drew said that as the band are welsh the dates should be put into the european format (day, month year), but today kiac changed them back to the american format (month, day year). which is correct guys?! you two keep contradicting each other so its making this very difficult to learn which is the correct way to do things.... Mister sparky (talk) 15:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Complete fail on my part. Got totally confused and did it without even thinking, Drew was right! My bad. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 18:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Gold" > the G should be in lower case g.
  • Modern Rock Tracks > Alternative Songs (redirects there, same chart different name)
  • No mention at all of any singles in the lead? The lead's quite thin, you could expand it a bit and not concentrate so much on their formation and style, but on their actual releases - remember, this is a discography.
Hmm. The lead is too extensive now (lol). As i said, remember it's a discography - it shouldn't stray away from the releases and details surrounding the actual releases. Information on television appearance, live success and their formation, is really not notable here and should be in the Lostprophets page only. You need to make sure discography is wikilinked in the first sentence (what if someone doesn't know what a discog is?). The second paragraph is trivial here and has nothing to do with the list, this part ("During this period the band built up a strong live following with support slots to popular acts such as Linkin Park and Deftones, as well as several headlining stints of their own.[4] The band subsequently toured with Ozzfest, played at Glastonbury and the Reading and Leeds Festival.[4][5] They also appeared on a number of British TV shows, including Top of the Pops, CD:UK and Never Mind the Buzzcocks. They also performed as part of the 2002 NME Carling Awards tour.") needs to be condensed. I understand that this was a major time for the band, with their success progressing without chart honors, but this is not all that relevant here. Critical response is superfluous here also. You need to concentrate on the releases. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 06:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also we need to make a decision about the ep's. because you are contradicting each other on that as well. are they notable enough to be included or not. also have been looking for days and cannot find a reliable enough source to use so cant be included anyways. gah! what do u guys think? Mister sparky (talk) 15:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion is that they are not even EPs, they are in fact demos. Perhaps promotionally released to record labels or local fans when they were still small - there is no real claim for notability in each article and they should probably be deleted or merged into other articles. If you can find a reliable source proving this viewpoint wrong, then we can include them, if not then they have to stay out on the basis they are not actual EPs. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 11:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
okay as with the certs i'm going to remove the ep's until a reliable enough source can confirm whether they exist or not, and they lack notability. Mister sparky (talk) 12:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

  • MTV link only sources one of the videos, the other 10 need sources too.
Done now. Mister sparky (talk) 21:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Find a better source for the two citations from Purevolume, it's self-published and not really necessary to be included here. Should be easy to find another one or two for what it's covering.
  • We're going to have to go through the lead thoroughly, it's not going to pass FLC as is. Note: "Featured List criteria 2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria." Concentrate on this, what's in the list is what we need to cover - the scope. Touring, producers and formation details aren't relevant here. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 10:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Music video directors sources - which seem to contradict others.

k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 11:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • thank you so much!! still cant find refs for the director of wake up or goodbye tonight, its really frustrating!
Happy to help. I'm assuming "Wake Up" was only ever released as a live video - meaning I would personally not require a director, just a note and reference of where it was filmed or something. Link for Goodbye Tonight - not 100% sure about this reference though, as it is his current production company, which he joined after making the video. Nevertheless, it clearly shows he directed the video for "Tonight". k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 13:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
voila! done. and thank you! you have much better searching skills than i have :) Mister sparky (talk) 13:26, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You get used to it! :)
You need to replace the onlinemusikvideos link with the already provided VH1 links and this one for Last Train Home. I don't like the look of that website. You missed the ref for the Malloys too. And they should be on one line, no need to put a line break between director and the reference. Visible Noise should have a wikilink. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 13:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
better now? :) Mister sparky (talk) 14:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We're getting there, we're getting there! I've done some fixes for you. There is still more to do however. 4:AM's reference could be replaced with this, which does not also contain Can't Catch Tomorrow for some reason. Found this on the website of the video's cinematographer, Christopher Pobst.
  • Was Thefakesoundofprogress originally released digitally? Way back in 2000?
  • No need to say "according to BBC Wales"

k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 07:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Only the original release's record label should be included. So Thefakesoundofprogress was originally released by only Visible Noise, I understand, so only VN should be listed, etc.
All three albums were released on both Columbia and VN in the UK? Should only list the first and main label to release it, only one.
  • forgot about the table! fixed now. 16:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I know, but they were wikilinked to the country pages when they were delinked, not the actual charts. :)
haha fair enough. changed now. Mister sparky (talk) 16:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We're so close, so very close! One thing i will note, in the future get into the routine of using the most accurate title of a page in the reference, as opposed to just the most descriptive comment (eg. Use '"Shinobi vs Dragon Ninja" by Lostprophets' as opposed to 'Shinobi video and director'), anyway, nothing major, just something to consider.

  • I screwed up the Last Train Home link, should be [2], that does not cover the director though. Ray Kay is wrong, he was the director of the Ryan Star song of the same name. Got one, select music videos then Brian Weber: [3]
  • Why is the full release date needed in the lead? Does it really matter, especially when it would presumably be released on different dates internationally?
  • changed to just month and year. or better to be just year? Mister sparky (talk) 16:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the second paragraph, title should have commas on either side - The band's first album, Thefakesoundofprogress, was released..
  • Visible Noise Records > Visible Noise
  • Remove "commercial" before singles, no real relevancy. Perhaps mention that Shinobi charted in the US.
  • Extended BPI > British Phonographic Industry in first mention in the lead.
  • put the band at the top of the UK Albums Chart for the first time,[5] and was also certified Silver in the UK. > put the band at the top of the UK Albums Chart for the first time,[5] it was also later certified silver in the UK.

Should be it after these. :) k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 05:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the lead, mention the fact they have two top ten singles in the UK?
UK Top Ten, "top ten" should be in lower case. Also remove Shinobi's mention of the UK Top 40 - not quite reaching the Top 40 has little relevance as compared to the Alt Songs chart and it's a bit long-winded.
changed. Mister sparky (talk) 12:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I mentioned below, Amazon is not a reliable source. Can you explain "Pictures of You" being the release? Wasn't "Boys Don't Cry" by Lostprophets released on just this NME Cure tribute? k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 05:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
looking at the image in the nme article, pictures of you was the title of the cd. Mister sparky (talk) 12:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's with the table code style changes? The alignment is rather poor now. It was fine the way it was, you had a few supports, no need to do major changes so late in a review. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 07:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
hi, i was experimenting with an idea with the column widths. but you're right it doesnt rly work, so have changed them back now :) Mister sparky (talk) 13:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Dt128 (talk)

Sorry if I repeat anything.

  • "EP details" should be "Album details"
  • The formats in which the studio albums and extended plays were released should be listed, per MOS:DISCOG.
  • No need to wikilink the "GER", "IRE" or "NZ" columns in the singles table, per WP:OVERLINK.
  • Why are the certifications in smaller font?
  • no reason really, but is too small isnt it. changed now. Mister sparky (talk) 16:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Instead of titling ref #1 "Allmusic", why not call it "Lostprophets > Biography"?
  • The author for ref #4 should be written as "McLaren, James".
  • The font size of the reflist seems a bit small to me.

Hope this helps, Dt128 SpeakToMe 09:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • The "Albums" section is not needed, it should just be titled "Studio albums" as there are no other albums released by Lostprophets.
  • No need to wikilink "Welsh".
  • Are there any sources for the genres listed?
  • the allmusic biography source provided after the genre... Mister sparky (talk) 22:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first use of "US" should be "United States".
  • Need a reference for "achieving a peak of number four in the UK Albums Chart".
  • "put the band at the top of the UK Albums Chart for the first time, and was also certified gold in the UK". References?


Thats all for now. Dt128 SpeakToMe 17:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Are you sure that none of their singles have been certified? Are you sure that their albums have not been certified elsewhere? I would suggest doing a sweep of all the major sites, just to be sure.
  • In the "General" section follow "General" with "<div class="references-small">", then the refs, then "</div>" . This should free up the "Specific" section.
  • I think the "Albums" section should be replaced by two separate sections titled "Studio albums" and "Extended plays" to keep consistency with other FL discographies.
see below
"Lostprophets > Biography". Allmusic. Macrovision. Retrieved 2008-08-24.

More comments from Dt128 (talk · contribs)

  • In ref #1, the biography was written by David Jeffries.
Done. Mister sparky (talk) 21:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'More comments from Dt128 (talk · contribs)

  • Important: Have Lostprophets not featured/worked on any release other than their own? Dt128 SpeakToMe 08:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • really dont think so, but will keep looking! seems strange if they havent... Mister sparky (talk) 21:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rolling Stone is published by RealNetworks, Inc.
  • BBC Wales shouldn't be italicized.
  • The publisher of the official website is most likely to be the record label.
  • You need to include catalog numbers next to the labels.
  • other FL discographies don't (eg rihanna, nine inch nails, girls aloud) so why does this one have to? Mister sparky (talk) 12:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All three of those were promoted over 6 months ago, and are getting outdated. Its only a small thing to add is generally required per MOS:DISCOG. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 14:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The second track from Start Something, "Last Train Home", reached number one on the Modern Rock Tracks charts." Reference? Try using a different ref than ones used in the tables already.
  • did look but couldnt find a reliable one, only forums. so used billboard. Mister sparky (talk) 21:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image in the infobox needs alternative text per WP:ALT.
  • still dont understand what that means, have looked at other FL discogs to see what theirs was and couldnt find any alternative text? please clarify. i'm probably just having a blonde evening! Mister sparky (talk) 21:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • NME is published by IPC Media.

Dt128 SpeakToMe 08:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dt128 (talk · contribs)

  • In the singles table, the "GER" and "NZ" columns shouldn't be linked per WP:OVERLINK.
i de-linked them the other day as requested. but then 2 others said no change them back. make your minds up guys! Mister sparky (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
have been de-linked now. Mister sparky (talk) 15:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change the widths of the "Other appearances" table to fit the other ones, e.g. Song -> 210px.
changed. Mister sparky (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC) Dt128 SpeakToMe 19:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Support, looks great, well done! Dt128 SpeakToMe 21:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! appreciate it :) Mister sparky (talk) 21:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Note FLC is currently short of reviewers; please consider reviewing one or more on the nomination list if you have not already (this message is being posted to all running FLCs). Dabomb87 (talk) 23:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your help! :) Mister sparky (talk) 15:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
  • "in 1997, [1]" No space between comma and space.
  • "The album was a success and was certified gold in the United Kingdom." If it was certified gold, I'm sure it was a success. Also, unlink "United Kingdom".
  • "The album produced two commercial singles;Shinobi vs. Dragon Ninja and the title track The Fake Sound of Progress." Singles are enclosed in quotation marks. Also, space after the semicolon.
  • "The first single released from their sophomore album Start Something was "Burn Burn" in November 2003" Comma after here.
  • "achieving a peak of number four in the UK Albums Chart[5]."-->peaking at number four on the UK Albums Chart.[5] (note that the ref comes after the punctuation)
  • yea i always thought the ref came before, oops! changed now. Mister sparky (talk) 12:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The album has sold over 2.5 million copies worldwide according to BBC Wales"-->According to BBC Wales, the album has sold over 2.5 million copies.
  • "The band's third album, Liberation Transmission was released on 26 June 2007 and put the band at the top of the UK Albums Chart for the first time[5], and was also certified Silver in the UK."-->The band's third album, Liberation Transmission, was released on 26 June 2007; it put the band atop the UK Albums Chart for the first time,[5] and was certified silver in the UK. (note again that the ref comes after the punctuation!)
  • "Singles from the album were Rooftops (A Liberation Broadcast), A Town Called Hypocrisy, Can't Catch Tomorrow and 4:AM Forever." Once again, songs are enclosed in quotation marks.
  • "The band's fourth studio album The Betrayed was originally due for release in 2007 but was delayed many times." "was"--has been, as the album is still not released.
  • "The title and several tracks were revealed in the August 5 issue of Kerrang! magazine, and the release was confirmed to be January 2010." "August 5"-->5 August (since you used British date format earlier), italicize "Kerrang!" because it's a magazine.

Dabomb87 (talk) 23:12, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Image needs alternative text per WP:ALT. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref 3, BBC Wales should not be in italics.
  • It would be great if you could find replacements for ChartStats, but I won't push the issue if you can't.
  • chartstats is used as the uk ref for all FL discographies that i've seen, its the only uk chart archive that covers positions 1-100 and is also listed at WP:GOODCHARTS as perfectly acceptable. Mister sparky (talk) 12:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refs 8 and 9 need publishers, and should be formatted like the others.

Dabomb87 (talk) 23:12, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the source was recommended to me on this very page by kiac, so a reviewer would not recommend an unreliable source. Mister sparky (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's not very convincing, with all due respect to kiac and you. To me, it looks little more than a blog post by Anton Djamoos. Is he an expert? How do we know that the site gets their information from reliable sources? Dabomb87 (talk) 15:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i do see what you mean, but in my search for a better source i found that the exactly the same info is listed at amazon.com, cd universe.com and punktheclock.com the makers of the cd and rolling stone. but will replace with rolling stone if you'd prefer? Mister sparky (talk) 15:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rolling Stone would be great. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
added. Mister sparky (talk) 15:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks, but do we need the absolutepunk source anymore? Dabomb87 (talk) 15:48, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
haha very true. removed. Mister sparky (talk) 15:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Dt128 (talk · contribs)

  • Found at least 5 contributions to other records here, are you sure there are no others? [4]Dt128 SpeakToMe 08:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of those, only "Figure of Eight (Turbulent Soundscape mix)" from [5] should be added per MOS:DISCOG.
Check out this, The Jam cover here and "Lucky You" is on the Spider-Man 2 soundtrack.k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 12:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • thanks for finding these guys! have added them to the article. suggestions for improvements? Mister sparky (talk) 16:34, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, Amazon is not a reliable source because it is a retail outlet.k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 05:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
changed. Mister sparky (talk) 12:36, 19 August 2009 (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/Lostprophets_discography/archive4&oldid=1151000014"