Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Nirvana studio albums/archive1

Nirvana studio albums
I am nominating this for a featured topic because I believe it meets the criteria. It has two good articles and two featured articles. I know the Delichon topic is featured, and it has two good articles and two featured articles too. Crowz RSA  21:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Until now there are only topics on "albums" and "discographies" and none on studio albums. Does anybody remember if there was a consensus at some point to require full album list as opposed to studio albums-only? Nergaal (talk) 22:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see what's wrongs with it, I mean, it's still a topic anyways. Crowz  RSA  20:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem is just that it fits a specific topic... by narrowing the subject greatly - the current discography GTs/FTs include compilations, EPs, live albums, and the such. But most of Nirvana discography is outside "studio albums", so pushing them all to GA would be tough. I'm on the fence with this one. igordebraga ≠ 17:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, the "M.I.A. albums" FT consists of four studio albums (well, one of them is a mixtape) but there are more articles on the bands albums. Crowz  RSA  01:57, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, all existing "....albums" topics (of which there are three) include all albums but not EPs. Having said that, though, none of the acts concerned seem to have released any live or compilation albums -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And for the record, the GT "No Doubt albums" does not include all albums. With this in mind, I see no reason why it goes against being a topic. Crowz  RSA  01:54, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose fails 1.d. All albums should be included. At Featured topics studioand live albums are included, as well as EPs and mixtapes. BTW Featured topics/No Doubt albums actually contains all eight of their albums (except one yet to be released). Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * So then how did M.I.A. albums (including 4/8 album articles) pass its FT nomination with 6 supports and 0 opposes? Plus, this topic is labeled Nirvana studio albums not Nirvana albums. Crowz  RSA
 * M.I.A. has not released eight albums, she's released four (if you include the mixtape), all of which are in the topic. Where are you seeing eight albums?  She may have released five EPs, which would make a total of nine (not eight) if they are now considered to be albums, but if it's now been decided that EPs count as albums (which would be truly baffling - how could anyone claim that How Many Votes Fix Mix EP is equivalent to an album.......?) then that's a blatant case of moving the goalposts since that topic (and the Bloc Party one, which would be similarly affected) were promoted..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, nine albums, but eight album articles, but how are EP's not albums? If they weren't albums what would they be? An album is defined by the Apple Dictionary as "a collection of recordings, on long-playing record, cassette, or compact disc, that are issued as a single item." That perfectly fits an EP. The only actual difference between studio albums and EP's that EP's are 36 minutes or less and studio albums are more than 36 minutes. In which case, the M.I.A albums topic consists only of studio albums. Crowz  RSA  22:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * To my mind an EP is akin to a single, not an album. "How Many Votes....." has three tracks, running for a total of 10 minutes, and would thus have been eligible for the UK singles chart had it sold enough copies (many EPs have in fact charted on the UK singles chart, including two that got to number 1!).  Most singles released in the 80s had a 12" vinyl format which included three or four tracks.  Most singles released in the 90s had a CD single format, which again had three or four tracks.  By your logic, these would all be considered albums.  At the end of the day, I'm not fussed either way.  If someone wants to nominate the M.I.A. albums topic for delisting on the grounds that it doesn't include releases with as few as three tracks then sod it, I'm not going to kick up a fuss (life's too short), but I would point out that it would represent a ridiculous moving of the goalposts.  This is all getting a bit off-topic now, feel free to suggest a better place to continue the debate...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:41, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that it was getting off topic, but either way, the topic is studio albums and not albums. Therefore, it should only include studio albums. Crowz  RSA  20:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Support—I think it meets all the criteria. I don't see why all of Nirvana's albums need to be included for a featured topic. Several, such as Sliver: The Best of the Box and Icon are barely notable, and not worth writing about.—indopug (talk) 13:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Although it could be argued the other artilces are not needed, precedent demands that live albums be included. Zginder 2010-10-20T17:16Z (UTC)
 * If the topic is studio albums instead of albums, it should not include live albums. Crowz  RSA  20:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The lead article is not about studio albums, it is a list of all music commercially released by the band. I agree that the way artilces are made about bands, and how topics are made about them is not ideal, but the precedent has been made, and I do not think this is a good time or location to re-discuss it. Zginder 2010-10-21T05:50Z (UTC)
 * Then why is albums a topic? Discographies include singles and video albums too. Crowz  RSA  19:29, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Neutral –After thinking more about this, I have changed my mind. As I stated before, I do not like the precedent. Zginder 2010-11-12T20:33Z (UTC)

Comment I'm the primary contributor to two of those articles, and this is the first time I've heard of this topic nomination. Just sayin'. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:42, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment At least by our discography article these are Nirvana's only 3 studio albums. But it strikes me as somewhat of a disingenuous link pipe to take an article on the full discography (covering studio, live, and compilation albums) to create a studio-only topic. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:55, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now simply because of the precedent. I remember not promoting some previous topics for something very similar to this. I would not mind the inexact piping it there was not a precedent against that specifically on album topics. Nergaal (talk) 21:18, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Support I don't agree with this precedent at all. You can have a "discography" topic for some artists and a "studio albums" topic for others. As long as you make a distinction it's fine. Studio albums are a well-defined, well-publicized topic for any artist. I'd say most non-studio albums, even if notable, can never be good articles because the existing coverage is not broad enough. This disqualifies almost every artist from FT/GT. If the intent of FT is to be useful for readers, excluding most artists is a bad precedent. A topic on studio albums is completely reasonable, it's much more well-defined than "all releases", and there's no reason it should be disallowed. —Gendralman (talk) 16:29, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Nominator's Comment I don't see why studio albums can't be a topic but albums can be... I mean neither have an article dedicated to them, like discographies include singles and video albums, not just albums. So in which case, I see no reason why this is unacceptable for a topic. Crowz  RSA  17:47, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed (see above). —Gendralman (talk) 18:17, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support - precendents are made to be changed, and I think that "studio albums of blah" is a reasonable, well-formed topic. -- Pres N  22:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: 3 supports, 2 opposes and a bunch of neutral votes/comments after a months. Sounds like a non-consensus to me. Nergaal (talk) 19:11, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well User:Adabow apparently never checked back at the opposes' comments and you just opposed because of precedents, but User:PresN says precedents are made to be changed, so I'm not sure if a consensus was released. Crowz  RSA  21:32, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry about not replying. I have been meaning to return here, but it kept slipping my mind. I've been thinking about this FTC, and I'll change my mind and support it now – it's not like there are any gaps in the topic given. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * So that is four supports, one oppose, one neutral, and three comments… Crowz  RSA  01:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll hold off 3-7 days to see if there are any more comments, then I'll make a final decision on this. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:39, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Support It seems that the consensus is changing and that was the reason for my reservation 4-1. Zginder 2010-11-30T22:23Z (UTC)


 * Closed with consensus to promote. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 03:16, 15 December 2010 (UTC)