Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Robert Plant discography/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 The Rambling Man 19:06, 17 January 2013 [1].
Robert Plant discography[edit]
Robert Plant discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Plant's Strider (talk) 05:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets the criteria. Plant's Strider (talk) 05:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
- One reference for the whole lead is not sufficient. Every sentence that can be contested needs a reference. Right now there are quite a lot of them.
- "nine studio albums, two compilation albums, two video albums, four collaborative albums and 42 singles." When comparing numbers they should all be in the same format. So 42 should be written out not in digits
- "He began his solo career with Pictures at Eleven in 1982, followed by 1983's The Principle of Moments." It needs to be made explicit they are albums it's too ambiguous at the moment and someone could mistake for bands
- " Although Plant avoided performing Led Zeppelin songs through much of this period, his tours in 1983 (with drummer Phil Collins) and 1985 were very successful, often performing to sold-out arena-sized venues." This has got nothing to do with the scope of the list, it's about his releases not his tours
- "Popular tracks from this period" popular according to who?
- "short-lived all-star group" I think supergroup would be better than all-star group, especially as there is an article about the term
- Too many instances of sentences starting with "In..." It's make the prose read like a list of facts, use it sparingly
- Plant has released nine albums, yet only a few are mentioned in the lead, this needs to be rectified
- Tables do not meet MOS:DTT and fail WP:DISCOG guidelines. See recently promoted discographies for how they should be formatted
- Release dates need referencing and the region that is referring to needs to be added
- Hyphens in references should be en dashes
- What makes Chartstats a reliable site?
A lot to be done before it meets the criteria. NapHit (talk) 10:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
- NapHit above really pointed out everything that is wrong. Style and sourcing is not adequate for a featured list.
— Statυs (talk, contribs) 22:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.