Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/The Kills discography/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 User:The Rambling Man 06:55, 14 August 2008 [1].

The Kills discography

Think this one's ready. Let me know what you guys think. Drewcifer (talk) 09:41, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
- I'd like the lead expanded a bit to include some discussion over the singles. EXPANDED
- Any reason why 13th in Belgium has its own reference which is the same ref for the whole Belgian column? FIXED
- What formats were the albums, EPs etc released in?
  - Personally I'm not a big fan of including formats in discogs, unless it seems super-duper notable for some reason. That info seems better suited to the release's article rather than a list of releases. Currently, MOS:DISCOG doesn't require formats to be included. Drewcifer (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well, MOS:DISCOG isn't = WP:FLC! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - That's right, but MOS:DISCOG is designed with FLC in mind. Drewcifer (talk) 18:21, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Obviously not in this case. Formats are good. Additional info is good. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        More info is not always good, per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:FANCRUFT, WP:LISTCRUFT, and a million other policy guidelines also suggesting restraint. Since this has in the past been at the editor's discretion to include, and so far without contention, I suggest bringing this up at the MOS:DISCOG talk page. I'd be happy to go with the community on this one if neccessary. Fair enough? Drewcifer (talk) 10:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Definitely fair enough. I just think that since it's a page about the releases then the formats of the releases doesn't really fall under those guidelines you've pointed to. I think the formats are an inherent part of the information to be conveyed. However, as ever, I'm happy to go with the consensus and, after all, it won't stop me promoting the list should sufficient support be forthcoming. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "URA Fever" or "U.R.A. Fever"? FIXED
- Where are the references for the music video directors?
  - Like most personnel-based info (ie album personnel, film crew, etc), music videos are generally considered self-referential, since they include the director's name in the video.
    - Really? I've seen plenty of music videos which don't include directors names. And other recently passed FLCs have included this information so this one ought not be different. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And the 2005 contributions to compilations?
- Keep on Your Mean Side is not mentioned in reference 3. FIXED
The Rambling Man (talk) 09:53, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
- "...and charted in the United Kingdom and France." → "...and charted in the United Kingdom and France."; FIXED
- "...United States, peaking at #133 on the Billboard 200." → "...United States, peaking at number 133 on the Billboard 200."; FIXED
- "US Ind." → "US Ind.";
  - The link leads to a blank section. Unless there's some content in the target article/section, I don't think it's helpful to link to it. Drewcifer (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why not have a link to the video on infobox? FIXED

Cannibaloki 14:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Add sources to the directors then i will support maybe. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Expanded it a bt, but there's really not much more to say. Drewcifer (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Be Black Hole Sun, I don't think that is entirely fair, do you? At least give him a chance to expand it rather than opposing blindly. Quality, not quantity, and if expanding it means he'd be blabbering, then its better as it is. Qst (talk) 13:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Probably been said before, but in all recently passed discographies, music video directors need references and so do all of 'Original contributions to compilations'. Red157(talk • contribs) 12:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments in response to the comments

I haven't looked at the discography yet, just the comments here, and I have a couple of replies to them.
- In the UK, directors are not credited on MTV and other music video networks. And from when I've watched the MTV Europe channels, neither do they, whereas in the US, they do. This is added by the network though, and not by the record label or whoever, so I would say they're not self-referential. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think it's absolutely necessary to link to United Kingdom or France. If you can find me a user of the English WP who doesn't know what or where these things are without having to use a link, then fine, otherwise it's just diluting the high-value blue links. WP:CONTEXT.

I'll comment on the list itself later today as I have to leave now. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the list

"Since 2002, The Kills have released three full-length studio albums..." does this mean they had other releases before then, or that this is when the band formed?
There are a couple of overlinking issues to fix
- Don't link two different words next to each other, such as American vocalist.
- Don't link American, British or United States per the same guideline, especially as you've already said the group is Anglo-American and wikilined that.
- Change United Kingdom singles chart to United Kingdom Singles Chart. "singles chart" should be capitalized, too.
Retitle ==Original contributions to compilations== to ==Compilation contributions==, which is used in the infobox

Yeah, a bout that: this is something I wanted to try out. The problem with "Compilation contributions" in most discogs is that since we exclude non-original material (like an old song reissued on some movie soundtrack or something), the section's title is somewhat misleading. This current title is my best idea on how to be clearer with it. And the title was just too long for the infobox, but they don't have to match 100% anyways, right? Drewcifer (talk) 05:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense, but then "Good Ones (Jagz Kooner Remix)" really shouldn't be included. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that section, "Good Ones (Jagz Kooner Remix)" is listed, but that appears as a B-side to "Good Ones", so is that really an original contribution?

Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 11 isn't working; Cannibaloki 05:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Didn't realise my comments had been addressed. Whoops! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was a little premature. I will support once the remaining music videos are referenced. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 20:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.