Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Sugababes discography/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal 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 kept by Dabomb87 22:10, 24 September 2010 [1].
Sugababes discography edit
Sugababes discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Notified: Underneath-it-All, Hotwiki, Mister sparky @actual discography.
The earlier parts of the lead discuss band line-ups, which is why they are referenced. Adabow (talk · contribs) 02:56, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you be clear on how it fails MOSNUMBER please? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ORDINAL - single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words, and the style should be kept consistent. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Althought in every GA/FA i've encountered its the norm to spell out numbers 1 to 99 in words. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 18:49, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I fixed it, took about four seconds. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:36, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Althought in every GA/FA i've encountered its the norm to spell out numbers 1 to 99 in words. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 18:49, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ORDINAL - single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words, and the style should be kept consistent. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you be clear on how it fails MOSNUMBER please? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okies, I thing most of the issues have been resolved. There is one deadlink in the references, one bare url and sources required for the 'other appearances' section. If those are fixed I will conclude that IMO (and as the user who requested removal) that the discog satisfies FL criteria. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 14:53, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, but note that the last two music videos' directors are unreferenced. Adabow (talk · contribs) 22:51, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm going with keep. The work to improve this has been very impressive and it's certainly not unsalvageable. The remaining concerns obviously need resolving, but they're fairly minor in comparison to what has already been done and are easily addressed through regular editing. While the original issues were serious enough to justify an FLRC, delisitng it now wouldn't be helpful. I have nothing but praise for the editors who have worked on this over the last couple of weeks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:03, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Agree with HJ Mitchell's comments and I'm sorry because they're things I should have said too as the person who nominated for removal in the first place. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 21:00, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- FWiW, I think you were totally justified in nominating it for removal, but, thanks to the efforts of the editors who've worked to save it, I don't think there are any outstanding concerns serious enough to warrant removal. My comment wasn't a criticism of you. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh no HJ, don't worry about it, I didn't take it as personal critism. There were genuine concerns and those have been addressed. I echo you're comments in thanking those who've contributed to fix the article which, now is more or less a featured list IMO. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 21:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The irony is that it's received more care and attention through being listed removal than it has probably since its original FLC! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:54, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh no HJ, don't worry about it, I didn't take it as personal critism. There were genuine concerns and those have been addressed. I echo you're comments in thanking those who've contributed to fix the article which, now is more or less a featured list IMO. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 21:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- FWiW, I think you were totally justified in nominating it for removal, but, thanks to the efforts of the editors who've worked to save it, I don't think there are any outstanding concerns serious enough to warrant removal. My comment wasn't a criticism of you. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have been told to respond, although my comments have not received any attention. The ladt two music videos' directors lack references, and the Dutch chart column in 'As featured artist' section is too. Once these things are cleaned up I will be happy to keep it as a FL. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, I'll see what I can do. A very quick search turns up this, though I'm far from certain of its reliability. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There's also this. I'll see if I can find editors more familiar with the subject matter. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:31, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, I'll see what I can do. A very quick search turns up this, though I'm far from certain of its reliability. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, no major issues outstanding, good work to all concerned. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have spotted a NZ gold cert for "Push the Button" at [2], but as the row is quite high, it probably doesn't need to be included. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:41, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, I referenced the music video director, and returned the Dutch chart in the featured singles section. I will change to neutral. The 'Other appearances' section confuses me a bit. Why are the featured singles repeated here? Why are some referenced, but not others? [sorry for not picking this up earlier:)] Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:22, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep looks fine now. Nergaal (talk) 10:48, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.