Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Azealia Banks discography/archive2

< 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 SchroCat 08:12, 3 August 2015 [1].

Azealia Banks discography

edit

Azealia Banks discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Azealia911 talk 13:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article details the musical releases of controversial American rapper Azealia Banks. Nominated once before, the sole reason it didn't pass was a lack of involvement, hopefully that won't be the case, and this time we can reach a clear consensus. Article has been worked on by myself and various others since the past nomination, and I feel it's even better than the previous occasion. Any and all comments appreciated, thanks. Azealia911 talk 13:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Littlecarmen (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Littlecarmen
  • American rapper Azealia Banks has released one studio album, one extended play Add (EP) after extended play since you use EP later on in the lead.
  • Banks officially adopted the present-day stage-name Azealia Banks. I don't think it's necessary to say that she "officially" changed her name back to her legal name. Maybe you should mention that it is her real name. And stage name doesn't need a hyphen. You spelled it correctly in the second sentence.
  • In 2012, she signed a record deal with Interscope and Polydor Records to record her first studio album. Change this to "debut studio album".
  • During which time, she released her first EP I don't think using "during which time" at the beginning of a sentence sounds right. Maybe change "which" to "that".
  • The EP has sold 35,000 copies in the United States. As of when?
  • In November of that year, her debut studio album, Broke with Expensive Taste, was released; the album which spawned four singles: "Yung Rapunxel", "Heavy Metal and Reflective", "Chasing Time", and "Ice Princess". I don't think this is phrased well. Maybe split it up into two sentences.
  • Extended plays section: "12-inch vinyl" Vinyl is just a material, change it to "12-inch vinyl record" or just "12-inch record". Maybe move digital download behind CD since it's sorted that way in the albums section.
  • Change the label for Fantasea to "self-released". The way it is now makes it look like it was released by a label called Independent. You also forgot a d in "Released" and can change "Formats" to "Format" since it's just one.
  • References: Link websites, magazines and publishers the first time you use them. For example, you didn't link Australian Recording Industry Association in ref #4 but you did for ref #39. ref #4 and ref #32 also aren't formatted the same way even though they should. Check this for the other references as well.
  • ref #6 is dead. Littlecarmen (talk) 16:17, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Littlecarmen thanks for your comments, think I've addressed them all. Azealia911 talk 20:22, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Everything should be ok now. If you find any others, kindly request you change them, there shouldn't be any, but checking overlinks in references is probably my weakest editing skill. Appreciate the comments, Azealia911 talk 18:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou! Much appreciated :) Azealia911 talk 16:16, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I also currently have a list nominated for featured list status here. I'd appreciate it if you could take a look :) Littlecarmen (talk) 17:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Crisco 1492 Is the fact that all of them have independent articles not enough? I understand your point completely, and have even used it myself when giving comments, but usually in FL discographies, the only listings that need references are the ones without independent articles, as seen in the "As featured artist" section. Azealia911 talk 00:29, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you're relying on the existing articles, that is fundamentally the same as citing Wikipedia. And Wikipedia is about as reliable a source as a blog by Joe Blow in Kalamazoo. (In policy/guideline-based terms, relying on Wikipedia as a source is a violation of WP:CIRCULAR) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:56, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Crisco 1492 No no no, certainly was not relying on citing the 'pedia. Independent articles just usually contain a release history section, I'm more than happy to cite the singles, it's just rarely done, on literally all the featured discographies I can think of, singles with independent article aren't cited. Azealia911 talk 01:01, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • You said that "Is the fact that all of them have independent articles not enough?", which suggests that you (and most previous discog writers) have depended on those articles having citations, rather than citing the single release in the list here. It's not the exact same as citing Wikipedia, but it does depend on the information in the single articles being cited. I recognize that most discographies haven't had references for the single/EP/LP/etc. designation of a release, but that's something we need to start changing. We shouldn't be relying on other articles to reference any information in our lists, even non-controversial stuff. I'll definitely be bringing up the issue with subsequent discogs I see. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree, my bad for depending on those articles, without even knowing so. I'd definitely agree with you on stricter rules for FL discography referencing. Have added citations to all singles. Azealia911 talk 01:29, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:55, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
SNUGGUMS Unfortunately not. WW sales are usually included in "Worlwide best sellers" year-end lists, and as you can probably tell, 30K in the first week of November won't really place her on those lists. Azealia911 talk 18:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be sure to as soon as anything's published, thankyou for the support. Azealia911 talk 18:40, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from FrB.TG

edit
Resolved comments from Frankie talk
* "In November 2008, when she was seventeen" → "At age seventeen, in November 2008".
  • "A year later, she released her debut music video" → "The following year, she.."
  • "In September 2011, she self-released her" – we don't start a paragraph with a pronoun.
  • Both, the second and third para start with "In [month] [year]" – rephrase one.
  • "In November of that year, her debut studio album, Broke with Expensive Taste, was released" – all of the commas after "studio album" are redundant.
  • "The album itself received positive feedback from critics and peaked at number 30 on the US Billboard 200" – shift this sentence to the above sentence I have mentioned. Also, Billboard 200 needs to be linked.
  • References that are already covered in the main body of the article, shouldn't be repeated in the lead section unless the purpose of the source is to verify something else which isn't in the main body – per WP:LEAD. For example ref 19 shouldn't be in the lead as it's already there in the Albums section.
  • The WP:ALT of the image is not something it should be – see this, especially the Queen Elisabeth II one.
  • Wiki-link labels in the "Extended plays" table.
  • I don't understand what is "Hung Medien" doing in ref 5.
  • Access date needed for ref 6.2 (the second bulleted one).
  • Link Billboard in ref 12 and de-link in ref 19 and 31. Also, it has to be in italics in ref# 31.
  • Publishers for ref 23 and 24 should read (and linked only in no 23) ARIA Charts.
  • Take Intent Media away from ref 30 as you haven't mentioned the owners of references, so it will be inconsistent to mention just a particular one. Likewise for others (e.g. Prometheus Global Media in ref 42) where applicable.
  • Unlink Ultratop in ref# 49 as it is already linked in ref 40.
  • Access date needed for ref 54. Likewise for ref 57 and 58.
  • Wiki-link Digital Spy in reference no# 55.
  • Is ref 58 a reliable one? The same for Pretty Much Amazing.
Both seem like reliable, professional sources to me, there's also no red flags after a search at WP:RSN. Azealia911 talk
What makes it not? Azealia911 talk
Have never seen it in an FL/FA/GA. Anyways, you can use this source. Surely this is a better one. -- Frankie talk 14:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, replaced. Azealia911 talk

Addressed all other comments. Azealia911 talk 13:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Make sure there is access date in every reference e.g. one missing from ref 3, 7, 27, 43, 49, 50, 51.
Checked and added, all occurrences of a lack of accessdate featured an archivedate parameter, I think an editor thought one could substitute for the other. Azealia911 talk
Checked and corrected, all should be ok now. Azealia911 talk
Fixed 'em. Azealia911 talk 16:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. However, I can still see dash violation in in ref 13, 38, 56, 67, 78, 87. Also, take away the owners of references (wherever they are) e.g. Hung Medien from Ultratop sources and remove ARIA Charts from sources by Pandora Archive. Also, make sure the links are working. -- Frankie talk 17:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed dashes, removed owners, only one link isn't accesable, which requires subscription to view UK sales, swapped another dead link. How's it looking now? Azealia911 talk 17:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou! Appreciate it. Azealia911 talk 10:24, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments:
  • Lead section: "she released her debut music video, a visual for a song titled "L8R"", I think you could edit "a visual", it is redundant.
Done Azealia911 talk
They aren't actually official features, merely Banks' remixes, one of which was even taken down for copyright. Maybe it'd make sense for me to do the opposite and remove the two womens' names from "other releases" the table? Azealia911 talk 20:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If it wasn't an issue with other reviewers, I think you should leave it as it is. I am giving you my support for this to be a FL. Good work. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou, muchly appreciated! Azealia911 talk 21:13, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments

None of the directors are sourced/referenced. Some are in the references to the video releases but most aren't. Dan arndt (talk) 23:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dan arndt...umm...did you actually check the references? Every single director is mentioned in the reference for the listing... Azealia911 talk 23:51, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, shouldn't try and get things done so early in the morning. I would suggest that in addition to the production company (i.e. Were Were Monkeys) you try and include the actual directors as well (i.e. Mihai Wilson & Marcella Moser) or Rankin should be John Rankin Waddell. If you can try and find who the actual directors at BBGun Films were that would be a bonus. I also managed to track down Fafi's real name for you, it's Fabienne Fafi. I hope that helps. Dan arndt (talk) 01:32, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For single directors like Rankin and Fafi, I think I'll stick with their stage name, they seem to use them for a reason, plus suggesting to change any vocalists stage names to their real names would be somewhat odd, so I'll paint everyone with the same brush. As for companies, I've added WWM's, however it was hard enough to track down the company that directed "L8R", finding the exact directors for a five year old low-budget video, all in a reliable source? After looking for the best part of an hour, I've got zilch. Thankyou for going the extra mile though, I really appreciate it! Azealia911 talk 02:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough - that's a personal choice. I would however change 'Rob Soucy & Nick Ace' to 'Rob Soucy, Nick Ace', as they are two separate individuals not a company (and I also hate the use of '&' when and is more appropraite).Dan arndt (talk) 02:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Separated the two. Azealia911 talk 02:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's great. I also have a query about the grammar in "It was further promoted by the single "Liquorice"." - how was the EP further promoted by the release of the single? Also if you could add ref [28] to the end of the sentence "As of November 2014, the EP has sold 35,000 copies in the United States." would also help. Dan arndt (talk) 02:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Singles promote projects, like how the video for the single features links to the EP in the footnotes "iTunes: (http://smartrl.it/1991EP)" when the video could've just linked to the single, as opposed to the full originating EP. I'd be happy to change if you want to suggest something though. As for the ref, WP:LEAD states that refs don't have to be repeated, but considering it's a challenge-able statistic, I can add it if you really want. Azealia911 talk 02:51, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know that singles are supposed to promote album sales but is there anything that specifically links the sales of the EP to the release of the single. I'm probably being pedantic & it may not be worth worrying about.
I think given it is a challengeable statistic its worth playing safe.
I would also suggest that the link BEL (FL) Urb. be replaced with BEL (FL) Urb. - gives a more exact location in the article. If there are any others where you can pinpoint the exact topic it would assist. Dan arndt (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Inserted sales ref, Ultratip doesn't relate to Ultratop, it'd be like doing the following [[Bubbling Under Hot 100 Singles|US<br>Rap]], linked it to a more specific place in the article though. Azealia911 talk 03:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see anything else, so I'm prepared to Support this nomination. Dan arndt (talk) 03:35, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou! Azealia911 talk 10:16, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from —Vensatry (ping)

  • "In 2012, she signed a record deal with Interscope and Polydor Records to record her debut studio album" - Too many 'records'
  • Not sure if linking music critics isn't WP:OLINK
  • The album itself received" - Why there is an emphasis (itself) in the sentence?
Vensatry, thankyou for your comments, I've addressed them all. Azealia911 talk
Thankyou! Azealia911 talk
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/Azealia_Banks_discography/archive2&oldid=1136457503"