Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Billboard number-one country songs of 2016/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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC).

List of Billboard number-one country songs of 2016

 * Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:57, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi everyone! With 72 of these lists now promoted to FL, here's what I hope will be #73. Notable events in this year include only the third song ever to enter the Hot Country Songs chart at #1, a superstar assemblage of country singers from multiple generations. As ever, I will respond as soon as possible to feedback...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:57, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Support from HAL
That's all. Great work as usual. ~ HAL  333  22:29, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Florida Georgia Line caption needs a period.
 * Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comma needed before and Brett Eldredge topped Country
 * Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Is which topped both charts. supported by ref 8?
 * No, but I didn't think that phrase needed a citation, as it's self-evident from the table..... - ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. ~ HAL  333  15:05, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * - responses above :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Happy to support. ~ HAL  333  15:05, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Other reviews
Comments from Dank
 * Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
 * I fixed two double redirects, so you might want to check for other double redirects.
 * FLC criteria:
 * 1. The prose is fine. The coding at the top of the table seems fine. I checked sorting on all columns and sampled the links in the table.
 * 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
 * 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
 * 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
 * 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
 * 4. It is navigable.
 * 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
 * 6. It is stable.
 * Close enough for a support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 21:33, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Support from Aoba47

 * Everything looks good with this list. I made some very minor edits, which were very nitpick-y, but otherwise, I cannot find anything that requires further comments or revisions. I support the article for promotion. Have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 17:48, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Source review Pass

 * Version reviewed this  Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Formatting
 * No issues.
 * Reliability
 * Seems fine to me. Most of the citations are from Billboard, appropriate for these type of lists.
 * Verifiability
 * Suggesting to archive all citations. This one was easy to check. Source review pass  Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 22:21, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.