Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of number-one country singles of 2000 (U.S.)/archive2


 * 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 not promoted by User:Giants2008 10:02, 30 July 2013 (UTC).

List of number-one country singles of 2000 (U.S.)

 * Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I originally nominated this list for FLC back in 2011 but it failed because some editors thought that we should not have lists of number ones for individual years. Seeing as a similar list for the Hot 100 has been nominated and already has support, I thought I'd give this one another punt ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comments:


 * I do not see support for the claim "based on each song's weekly airplay" in reference one. Please point this out if I'm mistaken.
 * Found a new ref -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:45, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The photos could use alternate text. No DAB links, no dead links.
 * Alt text added -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The source for File:Tim McGraw.jpg is dead. Please fix, and the file page wouldn't hurt from an information template either.
 * Changed to a different image -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Jo Dee Messina in Naples Italy.jpg needs the categories checked.
 * Dunno how to do that, changed to a different image -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I dislike the use of the rowspan here, it makes the table less accessible for screen readers and it makes the table unsortable. Do you have a specific reason for using them here? Albacore (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That seems the standard format for these lists of US number ones. The only alternative I can think of would be to repeat the song/artist for each week - would that be preferable.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I see that MOS:DTT has a table similar to this in regards to rowspans, but that table is sortable and uses scope row and scope col tags. It would make sense to break up the table per week since you have a reference for every week. I would like to see more input on the matter before a final decision is made. I also see that a "record label" column could be added to the table. However, I could see the tables from the 2000s combined into one article as in the MOS example. Hmm... Albacore (talk) 14:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll wait and see what other people think and am happy to go with the majority verdict -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose this is a fork according to 3.b. Nergaal (talk) 01:28, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Could you define which article this has been forked from please? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * List of number-one country singles of 2000s (U.S.) as per plenty of previous FLs. Nergaal (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to fork from an article that doesn't exist.........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * YES. There have been plenty of FL chart lists that encompass a decade, not just a year. Please see: List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Songs from the 1980s, List of number-one Billboard Christian Songs of the 2000s, List of 1950s UK Singles Chart number ones, List of 1960s UK Singles Chart number ones, List of 1970s UK Singles Chart number ones, List of 1980s UK Singles Chart number ones, List of 1990s UK Singles Chart number ones, List of 2000s UK Singles Chart number ones, List of best-selling singles of the 1960s (UK), List of best-selling singles of the 2000s (UK), List of NME number-one singles from the 1960s, List of 2000s UK Albums Chart number ones, List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums from the 1990s for precedents. Nergaal (talk) 02:31, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * And there are plenty of lists for single years that have been promoted to featured list (23 by year and 13 by decade lists of number ones are FLs from my count). This one has no fork, so how is that an argument? That would mean all the 36 featured lists referred to all have potential forks. There is no consensus about which format is preferred. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 02:59, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If you look through those by-year you will see that most of them were promoted before the decade-style ones became the norm. Nergaal (talk) 03:45, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Quick question, where and when did "decade-style" become the "norm"? Can you point me to the general discussion?  Cheers.  The Rambling Man (talk) 16:46, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Correct me if I am wrong, but I've counted 2 successful FLC in 2012 and 2013 for decade-styled song/album top charts, while for year-based ones there was only one successful one (which is not clear to me if the 3.b criteria was discussed enough) and two failed ones. Nergaal (talk) 23:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Since the topic of this list is not a fork, maybe you can assess this one on its own merits. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 07:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.