Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of music recording sales certifications


 * 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 User:Scorpion0422 06:14, 22 June 2008.

List of music recording sales certifications
Sort-of a co-nomination between myself, User:Reaper X, and all the hard-working people who worked on a similar list at Music recording sales certification. I've been working on this bad boy for some time now, and I think it's finally ready. If there's one thing I've learned about the global music market from working on this list, is that it's a messy disorganized place. So, hopefully this list can help make sense of it all. Any suggestions and comments are welcome and appreciated. Drewcifer (talk) 09:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I suggest you categorise it (and remove the tag) - also check the image caption - looks like a fragment so axe the period. Also, consider a more imaginative opening sentence for the lead rather than just repeating the title of the list.  The Rambling Man (talk) 09:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Good calls all around. Addressed all of your suggestions, hopefully. Drewcifer (talk) 10:33, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments


 * "See also" goes before "References" per WP:LAYOUT

Gary King ( talk ) 15:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point, fixed. Drewcifer (talk) 19:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Support I honestly think Drewcifer gives me a little more credit than I deserve here. Although this was created from my work, WikiProject Albums/Certifications, Drewcifer has taken that and put it through some exceptional expansion work. Besides adding singles, digital download singles, music videos, DVDs and ring tones (whoa, I never even knew you could certify those!), he has thoroughly added references and footnotes for each chart, providing the absolute best attempt at organizing this messy stew of information. Well done! -- Reaper  X  16:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Support - Just one note. Would it be better to call the DVD section "Videos" or "Video albums". DVD refers to one format that videos are released in. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 20:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree in theory, but I looked through all the sources, and it turns out that all of them except Canada says simply "DVD". Canada says "Video/DVD".  So given that one says Video, but all of them say DVD, I've just made the section's title "Video/DVD".  Cool? Drewcifer (talk) 22:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Further comment from
 * Do you have a citation for the IFPI stuff in the lead?
 * Added a citation for the only potentially contentious part of the lead. Everything is pretty self-evident. Drewcifer (talk) 21:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * For Mexico, I'd just include the current threshold and footnote the previous threshold.
 * I'm not sure which version you are referring to (it was adjusted around the time you made this comment). It was previously in the table (added by an anon), but it's been moved into the footnote.  Is that better? Drewcifer (talk) 21:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I moved it, it's taken care of. -- Reaper  X  22:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Can the first two tables be formatted so col widths are the same? Currently the first one (in IE7) is all over the place while the second one is fine.
 * IE strikes again! I keep forgetting to double-check stuff in IE.  Everything should be cool now, including your next comment.  Only thing I can't figure out is how to get the bottom left of the tables with the top and bottom column headers to be invisible.  Looks good in Firefox, but not IE.  But that's not all that big of a deal. Drewcifer (talk) 21:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:14, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Also would look great if last four had same col widths.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.