Talk:List of Cambodian singers/Archive 1

Where's prod template? And if I remove it, isn't the article will stay for good? (American)--125.27.54.210 (talk) 17:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * There's only one new template there. But isn't the article will stay for good? (American)--125.27.54.210 (talk) 17:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. You appear to have removed the PROD template successfully, and the next step is to take it to an "Articles for Deletion" discussion, which I have now done. You will see a new banner at the head of the article, and a discussion page at Articles for deletion/List of Cambodian singers. That will allow anyone who wishes to offer their opinion, to keep it, delete it, or whatever. You are welcome to add your opinion. (As an aside, articles can only be speedy deleted if they satisfy one of a small number of very strict criteria, which are described at WP:CSD - this article does not satisfy any of them) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Clean up
I've removed the Khmer Rouge section, as the Khmer Rouge was not a singer. I've also removed the "Artists who sings for Multiple Productions" section, as it's not a notable criterion and was only duplicating entries already in the article. Also tidied up headings, removed excessive references to the Khmer Rouge, removed doubtful and non-notable comments ("First known singer of Cambodia. Only one known singer of French Indochina. Died in 1935, 40 years before Khmer Rouge."), and sorted into date order (it was either that or alphabetic order - as it stood it was just random) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:22, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Trying to develop
I'm trying to develop the article. It looks like I'm destroying, but the list is too big. There's no "comments" or "year active" in other lists. See List of Afghan singers, List of Mexican singers.--125.25.15.166 (talk) 16:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Those lists shouldn't serve as an example, they are not at all what we want useful lists to look like. A useful list article should give more information than just the topic name and a link, otherwise a category is indeed just as good (or bad). Check out List of Russian people or List of operas by Mozart, for example, or in general most of WP:FL. I do agree that the current sectioning doesn't make much sense, certainly not after the latest pruning. was, in my opinion, an improvement. With eleven entries sectioning isn't necessary at all, down the line I'd recommend chronological sectioning (gender sections aren't that useful, in my opinion).  Amalthea  16:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. I thought the Pre/post Khmer Rouge chronological listing made sense, because of the complete destruction of Cambodian culture and its reconstruction afterwards (that's the way it was in the original). I agree that the gender-based split probably makes less sense, unless there is some valid cultural reason in Cambodia (I don't know - I've never discussed music with people when I've been there). I do not agree with the removal of the "comment" boxes, as I think we should be expanding lists with additional information where we can, rather than reducing them to bare lists of names. Looking at the 125.25 editor's recent changes, they reduced the article to just the names and then redirected it to a category - this looks like a deliberate attempt to delete the article by the back door, after having multiple appeals to take it to AfD turned down (it's already been there not very long ago, and the consensus was to keep it in its pruned version - the current version is the result of the AfD). There is further discussion at User talk:Jeff G. and User talk:TFOWR - our friend does seem to liking spamming multiple user talk pages with material that should be on article talk pages -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you add some colors to the table? Can you make the table for post Khmer Rouge?--125.25.15.166 (talk) 17:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * (ec) Right, the comments should stay and be expanded, that's pretty much what I wanted to say. A sortable table might be nice here, with the table rows colored to section them into pre and post Khmer Rouge. Amalthea  17:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * add the "record label" to the table. Record label is one of the important part for singer list.--125.25.15.166 (talk) 17:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think adding record labels could be problematic, because if a singer changes labels a number of times that could result in an unwieldy list - and other lists of singers don't tend to carry record label information (it usually goes in individual singers' articles if they're considered notable enough for them). But before a decision, can you provide reliably-sourced information? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:21, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, looking again, I think information about their record labels (properly sourced!) should go in the individual singers' articles - they all have them. (And as a note, the original version had singers duplicated in different sections depending on whether they recorded for one or for multiple record labels, which was nonsensical). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

=New table= Replace everything with this:

Female singers
Cool? Let me know! You can decorate it your way and replace it there. Maybe having one table with both m and f and seperating by having blue and pink colors.--125.25.15.166 (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Looking good
The version at Talk:List of Cambodian singers/draft is looking good. Just one question/suggestion - is there any way to sort the table by surname rather than by first name, as that is the standard way to sort on people's names? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:44, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I was thinking a combined list would be a bit better, with only color-coding the epoch, like in Talk:List of Cambodian singers/draft2. There's just so few items in the list, at the moment. Colors should be very light, and using only color without a textual marker has WP:ACCESS issues. No opinion on whether a label would be beneficial here. One other thing, the whole list should probably be renamed "List of Cambodian musicians", to have a broader scope. Amalthea  17:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, that's an interesting color option - but I also see the 125 editor has updated the Talk:List of Cambodian singers/draft table to include colors for male/female. Not really sure which is best. And yes, expanding it to musicians would be good - there are some at List of Cambodians, but I don't know if any of those suffer from the same notability problems that plagued the original of this article -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've done the voting in the draft. Go there and vote.--125.25.15.166 (talk) 18:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know whether it's better to color-code or to section the pre/post Khmer Rouge periods. I'd be happier with Talk:List of Cambodian singers/draft if the male/female colors were removed, to be honest, I think it's a bit much, and not really necessary. And as mentioned, semantic information shouldn't just be expressed by color coding or styling due to accessability concerns. Amalthea  18:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think there should be sortable columns for every way one might want to sort, including genders, last names, and first+middle names (to replace the current full name column). Also, references to the Khmer Rouge and the record labels should include wikilinks.    —  Jeff G.  ツ  18:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, I like the idea of something along those lines. I do we should have a gender indication, as it not clear to most English speakers - and when it comes to singers, there is a valid difference between male and female. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:13, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

It's a week now
It's a week since we've been started discussion, progress not going up.--125.25.236.20 (talk) 05:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Right. Protection has expired, we've had a discussion, and I think everyone can live with either draft version. Since the drafts now contain talk revisions I don't want to move them into mainspace anymore. I'd actually recommend a copy&paste move here, but please make sure to mention all contributors in the edit summary if you do that to comply with the CC by SA licsense (I hereby release my contributions to those draft pages into the public domain, so feel free to leave me out; see WP:Copying within Wikipedia for more). Amalthea  08:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, I'm happy with either of the two drafts, as both are improvements. Pick one, and make it so :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My draft seperates gender, yours seperates time period. We should find a way. We all knows Abaybay3 is 7 years old living in the Cambodia.--125.25.236.20 (talk) 08:52, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You decide :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I recommend, delete old one and move new one to main. My version is better. Everyone knows Khmer Rouge taken in 1975.--125.27.55.153 (talk) 17:11, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Deleting the old version first would remove the record of previous editors who had added content that is currently in the new version, and that is not allowed under the terms of Wikipedia's Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. So just add your new text as the latest version of the existing article. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:25, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * PS: If you are still not comfortable doing that, let us know here and I'll do it for you as soon as I have the time. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)