Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 2002 (U.S.)/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 Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009.

List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 2002 (U.S.)

 * Nominator(s): Efe (talk)

I am nominating this for featured list because it has been peer reviewed and I feel it meets the criteria. Thanks, Efe (talk) 02:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

 Weak Oppose/ Comments from  -- Mainly due to sourcing.
 * Singer Ashanti was the first act to have achieved the feat with "Always on Time", as a featured guest. -- Note the original composer.
 * Mentioned lead artist. --Efe (talk) 12:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Singer Kelly Rowland, then-member of the girl group Destiny's Child, scored her first number-one solo single with "Dilemma", a song by rapper Nelly, who also had his first number one with "Hot in Herre" in this year. -- Would be better worded as 'Singer Kelly Rowland, then-member of the girl group Destiny's Child, scored her first number-one solo single with "Dilemma", a song by rapper Nelly, who received his first number-one with "Hot in Herre" during this year.'
 * Revised as suggested. --Efe (talk) 12:42, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * In 2002, only three acts had two number-one singles, namely Ja Rule, Ashanti, and Nelly. -- How about 'In 2002, only three acts had two number-one singles: Ja Rule, Ashanti, and Nelly.'
 * Revised. --Efe (talk) 12:37, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Most of the number-one singles in 2000 were extended chart-toppers.  -- I think you mean 2001?
 * Its 2002. Sorry. --Efe (talk) 12:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The word scored is used a lot, I would use it interchangeably with 'earned'
 * Only three times. Removed one. --Efe (talk) 12:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * References


 * The main problem is that all the sources come from Billboard. Variety is needed from which the information is cited from.-- TRU  CO   22:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Variety of sources is not required in FLCs. Only the reliability and verifiability. --Efe (talk) 12:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Per WP:RS, Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable secondary sources. This means that while primary or tertiary sources can be used to support specific statements, the bulk of the article should rely on secondary sources. So at least one or two other primary/tertiary/secondary source should be used, such as a newspaper or other reliable source.-- TRU  CO   21:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Set up a discussion here. --Efe (talk) 00:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * See my comment there, maybe that will help clear up what I meant.-- TRU  CO   03:22, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you misinterpreted my comment, I never stated Billboard was unreliable or whether what type of part source it was. All articles need refs from just one publishing source, per WP:RS, (as I stated above and transcluded the text from there). If you just add at least 1 or 2 source(s) from another location to verify something that can replace 1 Billboard citation, then the referencing will be up to speed.-- TRU  CO   17:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. I'll try to add if I can find one or two. This debate has gone way too long. --Efe (talk) 00:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Added one from Yahoo! --Efe (talk) 10:07, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.-- ₮RU  CӨ   17:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments
 * Although nine singles reached number one in 52 issues of the magazine in the calendar year, two of which began their peak position in 2001, and are thus excluded. is not a proper sentence. The bit inbetween the commas act as if its in parentheses, so without that part, the sentence is "Although nine singles reached number one in 52 issues of the magazine in the calendar year and are thus excluded." which doesn't make any sense.
 * Removed the last comma. The first one is grammatical. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The Billboard Hot 100 is a chart that... →→ The Billboard Hot 100 is a record chart that...
 * I think the word record is carried out in this phrase "the best-performing singles". --Efe (talk) 09:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * 2002 is an Easter egg. Try to use the full titled link instead
 * Its rather awkward. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * May it be worth linking to calendar year?
 * I think that "calendar" is redundant. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * then-member reads awful
 * Is it grammatically amiss? --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "number one" vs "number-one": Be consistent (I think the latter is more correct)
 * No, "number one" is the noun version (so-and-so reached number one) but "number-one" is used as a compound adjective (she achieved a number-one single for the second time that year). Dabomb87 (talk) 14:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of the number-one singles in 2002 were extended chart-toppers. what does this mean? The songs are 5-minutes long?
 * extended chart-topper'. I think its clear. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Same with "Lose Yourself" is the longest-running single
 * Its clear. I think music articles are just too different from other articles here WP. That phrasing is widely used. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "Hot in Herre" and "Ain't It Funny" by Jennifer Lopez →→ "Ain't It Funny" by Jennifer Lopez and "Hot in Herre"
 * Fixed because its ambiguous. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Is "Lose Yourself" part of the "Rock era"? It's a rap song
 * Its regardless of the genre of the song. Rock era began in 1955 up to now. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Table entries are verified and correct.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.