Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Black Eyed Peas 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 The Rambling Man 14:00, 3 February 2010 [1].

Black Eyed Peas discography

edit
Nominator(s): Mister sparky (talk) 23:53, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because in the last FLC discussion there were alot of problems with the article that have now been addressed and more time has passed so there is now more information and article is longer. Mister sparky (talk) 23:53, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Quick drive-by comment - in the "other appearances" section, is it really necessary to have a notes column stating that the song was from the soundtrack of film X when the column immediately to the left lists the album the song's on as being the soundtrack to film X......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
hey, oops! sorry i missed that one! its just how ive seen the table set out in other articles and sometimes the column is necessary. i agree that it probably isnt this time. oh and i'd never tell you to get lost :p Mister sparky (talk) 11:34, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Not keen on a single-sentence opening paragraph.
merged Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here's a thing. Is it "the Black Eyed Peas" or just "Black Eyed Peas"?
the bands name is "black eyed peas", but the sentence flows better and sounds more grammatically correct saying "the black eyed peas" i thought... Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although the album got a four-star review.." - "got" - not nice. Perhaps, received?
changed Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "to chart lowly in " - lowly? subjective, I'd be more precise.
altered Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • sixty-seven, eighteen -> 67, 18
numbers are written in words in the rest of the lead, so keeping as words for consistency. Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the band released their third album" - is band singular or plural? "its third album"?
changed Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "two in Canada" - "number two in Canada"
changed Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It quickly became their most successful album in the US by reaching number one." - define "quickly"?
removed Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "it the bands first" - I may be wrong but I would have thought that should be "band's"
changed Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It held onto the top spot for twelve weeks and was knocked off the top spot by the album's second single" - top spot is reused to quickly, and we've possibly lost track of what "It" is from the previous sentence.
altered Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This also replaced "Boom Boom Pow" at the top of the charts in Canada and Australia, as well as also peaking at number one all over the world." - also reused too much.
changed Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Third single "Meet Me Halfway", has peaked at number one in Australia, Germany and the United Kingdom and has reached the top ten in several other countries, including the US." - unreferenced, and not grammatically correct to start the sentence that way.
changed Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Three of the EPs are unreferenced.
added Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • How did "Shut Up" not chart in the US and still make Gold certification?
it didn't chart on the hot 100, but the riaa says its certified gold. Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Video albums unreferenced.
added Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • As is other appearances.
added Mister sparky (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 14:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your comments! :) Mister sparky (talk) 11:12, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I noticed the IRE cell in the Singles section looks different than the others. --Another Believer (Talk) 01:51, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no idea how just that 1 cell ended up a different font size... fixed now tho Mister sparky (talk) 13:47, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
fixed :) Mister sparky (talk) 12:32, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Mm40 (talk) 14:33, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! :) Mister sparky (talk) 14:51, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Mm40 (talk)
Comments from Mm40 (talk · contribs). Ugh, not another discography! =p
General
  • No disambiguation links and ALT text is ok, but reference 35 is a dead link
Lead
  • "it only managed to chart lowly in" you should only use "only managed" with exact chart positions; I suggest "it charted lowly in"
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "its highest peak position in New Zealand" I think "peak" is redundant and can be removed
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "released it's third album" should have "its" not "it's"; the incorrect word means "it is"
missed that one, changed 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
added Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You don't use the abbreviation "RIAA" elsewhere, so remove it from the lead
good point, removed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Numerically order the references after the sentence ending "and number three in the United Kingdom."
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Need a comma after "the band's first US number-one hit"
the next word is "and", you can't have a comma before "and" Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and was knocked off the number-one position by the album's second single, "I Gotta Feeling"" can be reworded "until being replaced by the album's second single, "I Gotta Feeling""
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "has peaked at number one in Australia, Germany and the United Kingdom and has reached the" repeats "has" twice; take out the second one
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Numerically order the references at the end of the lead
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tables
  • The link on "Certifications" redirects to the link for "sales threshold". Do with it what you want
corrected link Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The last certification for The E.N.D. uses a different "x"
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The titles of the last three items in Extended plays link to specific sections which don't exist in the linked article
the sub-sections of the linked articles changed. fixed now Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would add a non-breaking space for I Gotta Feeling's release date so the year doesn't go to the next line
i know what you mean, but don't know how to do it... Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Under Singles, why is there a large gray line between the two 2000 releases?
  • Under Singles, why is there a large gray line between the NZ and SWI charts?
  • Under Singles, why is there a large gray line between "Shut Up" and "Hey Mama"?
don't understand what you mean by these 3... unless you mean the grey lines that have to be there that separates the releases rows and columns? Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should "DVD" be linked?
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • What do all the large gray lines in the Music videos table mean
same as above Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both directors boxes with Syndrome and Nabil Elderkin should read "Nabil Elderkin/Syndrome" for consistency
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sergio Mendes needs the accent
added Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
References
  • All three general references should have YYYY-MM-DD access dates
forgot about those, changed now Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • References 1, 51, 52 and need periods between Allmusic and Macrovision
added Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why doesn't reference 22 have Macrovision listed after Allmusic?
forgot that one Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove the extra spaces before the periods in refs 43–48
changed Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 42 needs a period between MTV and Viacom
added Mister sparky (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on the article; averaging over 1,000 hits per day, it's probably one of the most viewed discographies. I'll be happy to support once there issues are dealt with. Cheers, Mm40 (talk) 14:39, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fixed :) Mister sparky (talk) 22:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
has now been formatted like the rest, but isn't showing up as formatted. which i don't understand... Mister sparky (talk) 04:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In the URL, there is a space between "Mas" and "Que", and between "Que" and "Nada". I think you need to either delete the spaces or make them underscores (_). Dabomb87 (talk) 18:23, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, refs that are not in English need to be denote as such, using the |language= parameter. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for that. fixed now :) Mister sparky (talk) 18:39, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! Mister sparky (talk) 02:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

that ref is itunes and is in english? the refs that are in french, dutch or german say so. Mister sparky (talk) 16:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
At the time of my comment it wasn't specified, but since has been, so my comment is outdated. Afro (Not a Terrible Joke) - Afkatk 17:15, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Goodraise (talk · contribs)

  • In the video albums section, why aren't the labels of the albums given?
fixed Mister sparky (talk) 16:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are pipe-linking "Universal Island" (which I suppose you read on the physical album) to Island Def Jam Music Group. How do you know that "Universal Island" is Island Def Jam Music Group?
fixed Mister sparky (talk) 16:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reference 39 could use a date of publication.
added Mister sparky (talk) 16:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is the director field empty for the music video "Union"?
could not find via a reliable source. Mister sparky (talk) 16:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
chartstats was included because so far every other reviewer has accepted validity. however, have added everyhit.com Mister sparky (talk) 16:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Everyhit.com apparently doesn't cover titles that didn't reach Top 40. This leaves several entries sourced only to Chart Stats, the presence of which among the references is, by the way, not acceptable. Goodraise 17:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
removed the positions that couldnt be sourced by everyhit, used chartsplus for the others. removed chartstats completely. Mister sparky (talk) 22:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have you considered adding rankings in the Japanese charts? The E.N.D. for example peaked there at number two.[2]
the e.n.d charted highly in a number of countries around the world. but only choosing the countries where the band charted highly would not give a fair representation of chart performance. Mister sparky (talk) 16:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I never suggested doing that. I was merely giving a sourced example. Let me put it differently: Right now all countries covered are either European or primarily English-speaking. Adding (just for example) Japan wouldn't make the representation less fair, but more balanced. Goodraise 17:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have given this nomination a thorough review and fixed various issues myself and would support if it weren't for the issues listed above. For now, I will have to oppose, mainly because of the usage of Chart Stats. Goodraise 07:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can now weakly support this nomination. What's keeping me from fully supporting is the imbalance of covered national charts with all nations being either European or primarily English-speaking. Goodraise 00:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I have to oppose again. After reading everyHit.com's two about pages, about.html and about2.html. I fail to see how the page meets the criteria. My apologies for accepting the source initially, I should have acted more carefully. Goodraise 19:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
the BBC regularly uses everyhit.com as a source for its music articles one eg here, the BBC would not use a source which is unreliable. Mister sparky (talk) 19:32, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
also, everyhit.com has been cited by British MPs during policy discussions: [3]. Mister sparky (talk) 21:30, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
also by Reuters and even in Norway. Mister sparky (talk) 22:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, the reliable sources noticeboard thread on everyHit.com did not produce a lot of feedback. Looking at the provided examples of everyHit.com being cited by other sources myself, I have to admit that it's a start, but it's not enough for me to accept the source, especially since better sources do exist. Then there is the newly introduced source Video Static that looks to me like a random blog. What makes it reliable? Finally, there's the fact that the list limits itself to charts of primarily English-speaking and European nations, which is a balance problem at best, a lack of comprehensiveness at worst. -- "A featured list exemplifies our very best work." I'm sorry, but this list does not. Remaining opposed. Goodraise 02:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, the newly added reference 28 seems to be broken. It brings me to Allmusic's start page. Goodraise 03:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
well nothing else i can do about your chart opinion, each position can be individually cited by using chartsplus but that would be an unnecessary last resort. out of a list of 10 counties, only 5 are english-speaking and only 6 are european. the only other country you could be meaning to add would be japan. then that demonstrates an unfair bias towards japan on your part because of your insistance of its addition. and fixed ref 28. Mister sparky (talk) 18:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I said before, I was merely giving a sourced example. You said yourself that "the e.n.d charted highly in a number of countries around the world". I may assume that is the case for other of the band's albums and singles too? Those charts are published somewhere, aren't they? If they are, then not including them becomes an issue of comprehensiveness. Goodraise 00:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
well have had a good search through the net using various translators to find BEP charting info in japan. but so far, have only found that 1 album that charted there, the example you provided. which other country that has a reliable chart archive that isn't already included would you recommend? Mister sparky (talk) 00:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here the database entries for BEP albums that charted in Japan with online translation links for your convenience: [4] trans. [5] trans. [6] trans. [7] trans. [8] trans. [9] trans. [10] trans. [11] trans. BTW, the website can be searched conveniently from here. As for your question: You don't seem willing to understand that the existence of a convenient online archive is not a prerequisite for inclusion. Any reliable source will do, even ones printed on paper. Goodraise 00:17, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
also removed the videostatic ref until a more reliable source becomes available and added footnote. Mister sparky (talk) 18:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco

Comments

General
  • Alt text, dabs and external links all check out fine.
  • Did you consult with User:Garden about this nomination? Since he originally nominated the article the first time around?
didn't consult User:Garden because he only contributed to the article from 5th-21st Feb 2009 during the FLC discussions and hasn't been back since. Mister sparky (talk) 18:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • The main problem I see is that you state phrases like ..charted number two in France or ..charted in Canada. But there are so many charts in each country, which one could you possibly be speaking of? I would make it clear by stating which chart, as you did with the US Billboard.
added. but most redirect to the recording industry. Mister sparky (talk) 17:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Billboard Hot 100 should have the link when it is first mentioned not on the second instance.
fixed Mister sparky (talk) 17:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Studio albums
  • Why does the NZ pipe to the recording industry versus to a chart article?
rianz is the provider of the new zealand charts. and there isn't an article for the new zealand album chart. Mister sparky (talk) 17:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Goodraise above that why not mention all the charts? Not just English based ones.
main reason was that this is the english wikipedia and english is the most widely spoken language in the world. and only 5 out of the 10 countries are english speaking. 17:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
also, even with google translate, trying to understand the japanese website was proving very difficult. so if you know of an enlgish one? Mister sparky (talk) 17:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Singles
  • The first couple of singles need to be verified somehow since they did not chart, they have no legit or direct source.
added Mister sparky (talk) 17:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Directors
  • Why does Union not have a director?
could not find via a reliable source. Mister sparky (talk) 17:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
added Mister sparky (talk) 21:26, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--Truco 503 16:37, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! :) Mister sparky (talk) 11:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
having a quick look, the section of the article where the information is located has it as the heading. Mister sparky (talk) 22:17, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
good point! thanks, fixed. Mister sparky (talk) 00:31, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
thank you! :) Mister sparky (talk) 12:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: I cannot find any issues with this article. It is well written, properly charted and well sourced. It meets all the FLC criteria and does demonstrate the best WP has to offer. GroundZ3R0 002 22:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
thank you! :) Mister sparky (talk) 18:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
when i click on ref 28 it goes to the correct page? Mister sparky (talk) 15:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, you're right. The link in the article is correct. The link posted above by Goodraise does link to the homepage. No problem then. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:10, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
silly goodraise. Mister sparky (talk) 22:40, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I pointed it out. You fixed it. Why am I silly? Goodraise 00:17, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
thanks guys :) Mister sparky (talk) 21:39, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments – The writing itself seems fine, but why is "I Gotta Feeling" linked twice so close together? That has to be the closest repeated linking I've ever seen in an article. I also noticed the missing director in the video listing; this may have been tried already, but is the name given in the video itself? If so, you could just cite the video. Not a big deal if it isn't there, though. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
fixed the overlink, no idea why it was linked twice so close together lol. but the director for Union has only been found via blogs and fansites so far :( Mister sparky (talk) 22:40, 30 January 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Black_Eyed_Peas_discography/archive2&oldid=1207848183"