Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Fantasia Barrino 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 promoted by Dabomb87 23:41, 16 November 2010.

Fantasia Barrino discography

 * Nominator(s): Candy  o32  16:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because after making massive overhaul of the article removing fancruft and adding reliable sources, and then converting to the new discography style, I believe it now meets FL criteria. Candy o32  16:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC) -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 17:22, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment
 * STUDIO ALBUMS:
 * there is US and U.S., it should be 3 US
 * album charts haven't got references, see here for example.
 * SINGLES US should be unlinked
 * REFERENCES: one link with timeout: here
 * Done, but about the ref, something is wrong with the RIAA site today. I was working on another discog and that happened. Candy  o32  18:18, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The link is working for me now. Ucucha 18:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * for me too. -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 19:48, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment
 * FEATURED SINGLES: what is that? is it notable to split it off from the singles box?
 * See featured lists Taylor Swift discography, Kesha discography, Rihanna discography and more.


 * STUDIO ALBUMS:
 * album charts haven't got references, see here for example.
 * Oops, done.


 * Infobox: i see there is no caption, what about Winner of season 3 of American Idol, Fantasia Barrino. or the location in the pic.
 * Done. Candy  o32  20:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 19:55, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Support: until you add a reference in Featured single US R&B-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 20:24, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Candy  o32  20:46, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * add an External links section, i.e. allmusic, official website, discogs, musicbrainz...-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 20:55, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Candy  o32  04:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Good work Adabow (talk · contribs) 02:50, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments - Is there a reason why there's an excessive use of Boldface? Afro  ( Talk ) 19:43, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * All changes to this discog and current featured lists are due to the new formats/style per WP:DISCOGSTYLE. Candy  o32  20:24, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That is a proposed guideline, until theres a consensus on it, you should follow the format of a recent FL, if the guideline is adopted the changes can always be added in future to update the list. Afro  ( Talk ) 21:01, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Consensus was established on the talk page to being converting, as several FL's have been converted including Kelly Rowland discography, Kesha discography, Rihanna discography, Hilary Duff discography, and Ashley Tisdale discography, among others. Candy  o32  04:04, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have looked over the talk page and consensus doesn't seem to of been reached as of yet, currently though the proposed guideline does fail MOS:BOLD at the very least which was my original question. Afro  ( Talk ) 17:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Editors may wish to comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies/style. We need to address internal inconsistencies between style guides before they cause too much trouble. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Afro, I do not like this new styling of discographies either (especially the bolding of single titles), but according to WP:ACCESS (specifically here) apparently these changes have been made to optimise readability for less-able readers. MOS:BOLD allows bolding for table headers, which these are. I think we will just have to suck it up and accept these changes. Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:08, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no significant aesthetic change. It's quite the opposite, this new layout improves readability. Your reaction is normal, because you are used to a certain layout. And changing habits is surely disturbing, and sometimes unpleasant. But once you will have seen this layout several times, you'll get used to it. And later on, you'll get attached to it just as much as you were attached to the previous one. Kind regards, Dodoïste (talk) 14:00, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * For the third time of asking, why isn't the Music videos section bold in the same way as the singles and albums? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I fixed it at the same time as your reply. Dodoïste (talk) 00:23, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ref 13, 17 and 19 seem to have coding issues. Ref 17 also has a date inconsistency. Afro  ( Talk ) 16:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Refs 13 and 19 fixed, but I don't seem to find a problem with 17. Candy  o32  17:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I believe you meant 7, and its fixed now. Candy  o32  17:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoops, silly me I also seem to have no more problems with the list, Support. Afro  ( Talk ) 17:48, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Support, there are not really any major issues here. Rather than debate too much about the WP:ACCESS part of MOS, everything else is quite good about this article. WP:ACCESS is part of the MOS and DISCOGSTYLE shows one way in which ACCESS can be achieved. Personal preferences on style should not hold back the progress of articles. Though I will be one of the first to agree that how we apply ACCESS to DISCOGS is still being debated etc. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  01:02, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You do realise it still contravenes WP:MOS because of the bold table captions, don't you? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:02, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The question was raised at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (text formatting). Few people commented, so the question is still open. Dodoïste (talk) 16:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm now challenging the assertion that bold table captions are not a recognised exception at WP:MOSBOLD. It may be worth suspending judgement here until consensus forms. --RexxS (talk) 16:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Has this consensus already taken place? Because someone has already gone ahead and removed every bolded item in the discog. Candy  o32  19:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Using the recent change to mediawiki's common.css, the bolding is now optional, but will still be obvious to screen-readers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

oppose per WP:MOSBOLD which states that table headers should be in boldface; the use of  directly violates this for the row-headers. Jack Merridew 19:21, 9 November 2010 (UTC) striking this as the whole thing is still in flux. Jack Merridew 01:01, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh gosh, just what the hell is going on when I'm busy at work? FLC candidates are not the place to debate rules. There is WT:FLC for this, and other MOS pages. We're not to annoy editors who are trying to do their best and make the article accessible. It would be awesome if every featured lists would conform to accessibility requirements. But accessibility should not be perceived as a hindrance, and especially not prevent excellent lists to gain the featured status. So please don't do that. There has been enough mess here already. Dodoïste (talk) 20:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Caption: "performs as a lead" -> performed.
 * Why should this be in past tense as they same songs "live" or can be played over and over so she "performs" and has not "performed" as its not a one-time live performance or anything.
 * Not sure I like this, but I'll leave it out there. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:24, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


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