Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Magnapop band members/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 not promoted by Dabomb87 21:41, 24 September 2010 [1].
List of Magnapop band members (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:27, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list status because it appears consistent with the featured list criteria, is not subject to substantial changes in the future, is comparable to other featured band member lists (List of Nine Inch Nails band members, List of Red Hot Chili Peppers band members, List of Slipknot band members, and List of Megadeth band members), and I will work on this page to make improvements as necessary. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:27, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Possible withdrawl As "users should not add a second FL nomination until the first has gained support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed" and I also nominated Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Smashing Pumpkins band members/archive1. Sorry. On the other hand, FA procedure allows for multiple nominations if someone is a co-nominator and I am the co-nominator at the other FL nomination. (Cf with my talk.) If this is formally closed or withdrawn, I will resubmit after that article has passed or been rejected. Thanks for everyone's patience. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:49, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Recommend peer review (so oppose) for a few reasons:
- The lead is woefully short, you need to summarise what this list is going to talk about.
- A large number of red links in the list, is the content actually notable enough to warrant a standalone list, if only two members have their own article?
- Members section appears to be almost (if not entirely) unreferenced.
- References need consistent and comprehensive formatting.
- Timeline is pretty hideous.
- You have almost as many external (spammy) links as you do references, that should ring warning bells.
- Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn If for no other reason than the redlinks, which will not be resolved any time soon. Thanks for your time reviewing it, though. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:41, 24 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.