Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Keri Hilson 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 The Rambling Man 18:08, 26 March 2012.

Keri Hilson discography

 * Nominator(s): Oz   talk  12:18, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have been working hard on improving the article for quite some time now, basing it on FL listed discographies such as Katy Perry discography. I believe it now meets the FL criteria. Oz  talk  12:18, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Support just one thing I noticed, the MTV refs use the work parameter yet they are not italisced. I noticed you added two apostrophes to the cite template, you don't need to, as it puts the italics in automatically. I've fixed ref 49 as well, should have been cite news, as it the ref was from MTV news, other MTV refs are fine as cite web. NapHit (talk) 13:53, 18 February 2012 (UTC) Done
 * Image review: The image used appears to be free and properly tagged.  Good raise  23:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Is that a good or bad thing? Oz   talk  01:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's a good thing. I only note it to spare other reviewers the trouble of checking again and to keep track of where I've checked. You need not do anything about it. In case you wonder what this is about, read WP:IUP, which is part of WP:WIAFL.  Good raise  14:31, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Support seems in line with other featured discographies. One point- the opening sentence "...two studio albums, twelve singles as a solo artist, as well as seventeen as a featured artist, and twenty-nine music videos." should not have the "as well as", or else should not have the comma before it. You should also consider archiving your references via webcite or web archive (and the |archiveurl= and |archivedate= paremeters in the references) - while not an FLC criteria, if the websites you are linking to every go away or change drastically, you'll be left with a bunch of uncited information. -- Pres N  19:24, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Oz   talk  20:36, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Support—Seems solid to me. Unfamiliar with bundled refs but I see no problem with them as they keep the list itself neater. List overall is of a good quality, so I'm happy to support. GRAPPLE   X  00:14, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


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