Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Hot Soul Singles number ones of 1981/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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 9 December 2023 (UTC).

List of Hot Soul Singles number ones of 1981

 * Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

With 1979 just promoted and 1980 seemingly heading the same way, here's 1981. We've got a few all-time greats in this list but also Frankie Smith, who spent four weeks at number one and then literally never charted again (although he may have left a legacy in that the song may have been the origin of the "izzle" now associated with Snoop Dogg). Feedback as ever most gratefully received! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

 * A number of other artists reached number one for the first time later in the year -- suggest also reached
 * Smith's track was followed into the top spot -- I recall from a previous review/reviewer that track is generally not suited, I believe it's either single or song.
 * weeks at number during 1981 -- I think you're missing one (number one) in this statement
 * Suggest alt text for the Vandross and Ross image
 * That's all I have. Great work as usual. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * - thanks for your review. All corrected now! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

NØ

 * Image review - pass: All of the images are appropriately licensed!
 * The close-proximity double link to Black music is present here as well. I'll stop bugging you about this if there's an explanation, really...
 * No other explanation other than that I am really dumb. I promise I will remember this next time -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:10, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * "the chart has undergone various name changes over the decades to reflect the evolution of black music and since 2005 has been published as Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs." - Suggest commas before and after "and since 2005"
 * I would suggest active voice for the second paragraph's first sentence: "In the issue of Billboard dated January 3, "Celebration" by Kool & the Gang spent its third week in the top spot."
 * "In May, Ray Parker Jr. & Raydio topped the chart for the first time with "A Woman Needs Love (Just Like You Do)", and two months later Frankie Smith reached number one with "Double Dutch Bus", the only charting single of his career." - Suggest comma after "and two months later"
 * In the third paragraph, the first sentence just says "The year", whereas the second sentence mentions 1981. You could switch these since I find it is often best to be more descriptive in the first line of a paragraph.
 * "former labelmates of Ross with the highly influential Motown label" - True for sure but is it really necessary to call it highly influential?
 * That's it!--NØ 08:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * - thanks! Done!! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:10, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Support--NØ 09:13, 14 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Quick comment – Ref 16 needs a publisher (Billboard), and the hyphens there could stand to be made into en dashes for style. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 18:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * - that's done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:26, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Dank

 * Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
 * "the four weeks which "Celebration" spent at number one in January": This construction is in the process of disappearing in copyedited text. I recommend either "the four weeks spent at number one in January by "Celebration"" or "Celebration" four weeks spent at number one in January".
 * Checking the FLC criteria:
 * 1. Nothing else is jumping out at me as a prose problem. I checked sorting on all sortable nonnumeric 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 list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual 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. I see you have an image review already. The captions are fine.
 * 6. It is stable.
 * Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 17:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * - thanks! I went with the first option re: Celebration......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Source review – All of the references are to reliable sources and appear to be formatted well. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 22:13, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. -- Pres N  19:07, 8 December 2023 (UTC)


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