Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Hot Country Singles number ones of 1963/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) 00:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC).

List of Hot Country Singles number ones of 1963

 * Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I apologise if everyone is thoroughly sick of lists of country number ones by now, but here's the latest. Random fact: one of 1963's chart-toppers was "Whispering" Bill Anderson, who was the first artist I ever saw in concert, when I was six years old (I didn't go under my own steam) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Harrias
Nice work; nothing major, just a bit of tidying needed. Harrias talk 13:38, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In light of the recent RFC on table captions (closed back in May) and how FLCs have to follow MOS:ACCESS, a table captions should be included in all tables. This quote by PresN might apply to this list: "In the case that the table is the first thing in a section where the section header is essentially the same as what the caption would be, and therefore looks duplicative visually, you can make the caption screen reader-only with the sronly template, e.g. "
 * "..single week, however, before the.." Remove "however", it is unnecessary.
 * "..during the spring.." Per MOS:SEASON, don't using seasons as a reference time-frame.
 * "..but it would be the.." This might work better as "..though it was the.."
 * "In May, Hawkshaw Hawkins also topped the chart for the first and only time.." Not technically true, as it went back to the top in June.
 * "In the fall.." Same as above.
 * "He spent the highest total number of weeks at number one in 1963.." It is unclear if this means that he spent more time at the top than anyone else, or if he spent more time at the top in 1963 than he did in any other year.
 * "The song would remain at.." Maybe change "would remain" to "remained".
 * "..he would go on.." And maybe "he went on" (can you tell I'm not keen on "would", except in very specific situations?
 * No dablinks. (No action needed).
 * Images all have alt text. (No action needed).
 * Images all seem appropriately licensed. (No action needed).
 * all done, I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:59, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support: I reverted one change back, because on reading through the flow I think what you had was better. I will claim WikiCup points for this review. Harrias  talk 14:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Dank

 * If you'll let me put my copyeditor hat on for a moment ... reading the above comments, I know when writers hear people objecting to "would", sometimes they get exactly the wrong idea ... that they should never use it. Just my opinion, but the two instances of "would" that you've got left (after Harrias's comments and your edits) are exactly right.
 * You know my standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing.
 * "In May, Hawkshaw Hawkins topped the chart with "Lonesome 7-7203", his first and only single to reach number one.": It's a common metaphor, it's not wrong, but I think it's a little bit gruesome to talk about dead people doing things. How about this? "In May, Hawkshaw Hawkins's "Lonesome 7-7203" topped the chart, his first and only single to reach number one."
 * I see no problems with the chart links and coding.
 * I see Harrias has checked out the images.
 * A short description is not needed for this list IMO because the name of the list is sufficient.
 * FLC criteria:
 * 1. The prose is fine. (Some will object to "a number of", and I'm not a fan, but topic sentences often have statements that would be too broad in other contexts, so I'm not complaining.)
 * 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. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
 * 6. It is stable.
 * Support, since this is close enough to the finish line. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 15:44, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your support, . I have amended the sentence about Hawkins, although I have worded it ever-so-slightly differently to avoid that whole "do you put 's or just ' after a name ending in s?", which I can never seem to get right :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:55, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Good call. - Dank (push to talk) 15:56, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support I tried, but I couldn't find anything. ~ HAL  333  19:15, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass
Chris, I have no idea how you could think people would be "sick of your lists" – your commitment and output is awesome!
 * Pass for source review – I tweaked the ISBNs around and linked a publisher. Aza24 (talk) 09:32, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Support from WA8MTWAYC
Support This is a great list, I also couldn't find something. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 21:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 01:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.