Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Godflesh/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 promoted by The Rambling Man via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC) [1].[reply]
List of songs recorded by Godflesh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): CelestialWeevil (talk) 02:12, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because the information at hand is comprehensive, cited, and relayed in an easy to understand manner. I want to make Godflesh a good topic, but I don't have a great deal of experience with lists. This page, List of songs recorded by Godflesh, and, if it passes, Godflesh discography, will help make that topic come to life. Thanks in advance, everyone. CelestialWeevil (talk) 02:12, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from TompaDompa (talk) 00:06, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
TompaDompa (talk) 12:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
Support TompaDompa (talk) 00:06, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
--Cheetah (talk) 18:08, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support--Cheetah (talk) 01:30, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from — Bilorv(c)(talk) 15:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
* For footnote (a): does the 168 figure include these three? My understanding is 'no' but make the connection clearer: I would rephrase the footnote to "Additionally, Goldfish have recorded at least three songs..." Also, we have a WP:CRYSTAL concern with "(and likely never will)" – remove it – and there's a grammatical mistake with "that have never [...] be released".
Nice work overall on an interesting topic. — Bilorv(c)(talk) 23:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support: excellent work! — Bilorv(c)(talk) 15:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support ~SML • TP 16:06, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 10:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments Looks like a good list, these are my comments.
Incidentally, my current open FLC is YouTube Awards. If you've got the time, I welcome any comments on it. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 22:36, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Final couple of comments from me:
Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 10:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support No other comments from me. I do think you should reconsider that photograph of the top of Justin Broadrick's head – it doesn't really identify him or anything, and it just doesn't seem all that encyclopaedic to me. It kind of reminds me of when, for four months, the lead image in our article for Charlie Brooker was a photograph of the back of his head. Anyway, this isn't a massive issue, nor is it something that I would oppose over. Good work! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 10:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 20:52, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
Resolved comments from RoseCherry64 (talk) 00:15, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comment — The writer(s) section lists both bands and songwriters (currently, only Bruce Gilbert). Per liner notes, and external sources such as ASCAP, one could find the actual writers of the songs. I'm also not sure if including a picture of Black Sabbath (wrong lineup for the song they covered) or Pantera is justified. RoseCherry64 (talk) 21:56, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support — No more issues from me. I'll note that one would have to scroll through 11 pics before the songs section on mobile. However, other featured lists also have heavy use of images, so I'm not raising an issue about this. RoseCherry64 (talk) 00:15, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – Very good. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 17:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review –
- All of the references are well-formatted, and the link-checker tool shows no problems.
- Spot-checks of refs 10 and 18 also show no issues.
I'm a little concerned about the reliability of BrooklynVegan (ref 8). Our article on the subject implies that this is just a blog with no real editorial oversight. Fortunately, it looks like the bit of information this sources could probably be found in something more reliable, and I suggest doing so.Other than that, the sources look all right, although my knowledge of metal websites is admittedly lacking. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Giants2008: I replaced the BrooklynVegan reference. Thanks for the review! CelestialWeevil (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The new source looks good. With that done, I consider this source review a pass. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:05, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Giants2008: I replaced the BrooklynVegan reference. Thanks for the review! CelestialWeevil (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.