Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Coldplay/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) 21:31:19 30 July 2019 (UTC).

List of songs recorded by Coldplay

 * Nominator(s): – zmbro (talk) 04:50, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Continuing my clear obsession with British rock bands is my next song list, this time the rock band Coldplay. Seeing how many of Coldplay's articles are GAs and most of their lists are FLs, seeing this one like this just didn't do it for me. As always, I'm open to any comments or concerns anyone might have. Happy editing! :-) – zmbro (talk) 04:50, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Yashthepunisher (talk) 11:49, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Fix this green link.
 * Period missing from alt texts.
 * The prose seems fine to me.
 * All done. Thanks so much! – zmbro (talk) 15:18, 21 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Support this nomination. Can you please leave your comments at my ongoing FLC as well? Yashthepunisher (talk) 18:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * "British rock band Coldplay has recorded" - in UK English bands' names are treated as plural, so this should be "British rock band Coldplay have recorded", and you need to ensure you are using plural forms throughout (as indeed you already do in the very next sentence.....)
 * "among the best-selling albums in UK chart history." - I don't think the word "chart" is needed here
 * "Since their formation, Coldplay credits all of their songs" - plural/single/plural - ugh! :-)
 * Also, the correct tense would be "Coldplay have credited"
 * " In the beginning of their career" => "At the beginning...."
 * "said to reminiscent " => "said to be reminiscent "
 * "X&Y is different than" => "X&Y is different to" (we don't say "different than" in UK English)
 * "more stripped-down melancholy style" => "more stripped-down melancholic style" (melancholy is a noun)
 * "overarching theme that there's" => "overarching theme that there is"
 * Is that a direct quote (it sounds like one)? If so, it needs to be attributed.
 * You don't mention anywhere in the lead that the band have also recorded as "Los Unidades" - you need to explain this, otherwise it's not clear why songs by that "act" suddenly pop up in the table.
 * That's what I have spotted in the lead -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:27, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
 * All done. Thanks for the input! :-) – zmbro (talk) 15:48, 21 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Further comments
 * My only comments on the table relate to songs which appear more than once. For example, if "Lost?" is just an acoustic version of "Lost!" and "Lost@" is just a live version then they aren't different songs and therefore don't need to be listed separately.  Most bands will have released a live album at some point but I wouldn't expect to see the tracks from it listed separately in a "List of songs recorded by...." article, because they aren't different songs.  If they are listed separately here because they have (fractionally) different titles then I think that can be covered by a footnote against the entry for the original song.  Similarly you have "How You See the World No. 2" listed, which just seems to be a remix of the song above.  Many Coldplay songs have been remixed, so I don't see a compelling reason for this one to be shown here as a separate song. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah you're right I just put them in notes on the originals. That better? – zmbro (talk) 16:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * are the following pairs also different mixes/recordings of the same song?
 * "Lost!" and "Lost+"
 * "Life in Technicolor" and "Life in Technicolor ii"
 * "A Message" and "A Message 2010"
 * ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * "Lost!" and "A Message" are (changed that) but with "Life in Technicolor", "i" is an instrumental that was released on Viva la Vida while "ii" was the vocal version of it that ws released on Prospekt's March; "ii" was also the version released as an actually single (and has its own page on WP), so I think these two warrant a separation. – zmbro (talk) 21:57, 22 May 2019 (UTC)


 * That sounds reasonable. Now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:27, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * According to the key, the blue highlights songs that were written or co-written by the band, but its usage in the table seems to indicate it highlights the opposite.
 * Cannot believe I never caught that. Supposed to be "not written" – changed.


 * This is a question more than anything — the notes that indicate that a song also appears on a different album, wouldn't it make more sense to have them alongside the album name in the songs respective row instead of next to the song itself?
 * That's how I've done it for all the other song lists I've brought up to FL.

The lead looks great. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 16:34, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for the comments! :-) – zmbro (talk) 21:17, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Concerns addressed/explained so I support the nom now. I also have a (considerably similar, oddly enough) FLC ongoing if you would like to make comments/criticisms! DanielleTH  (Say hi!) 14:15, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure thing! – zmbro (talk) 15:54, 27 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Missing dots in notes. Eurohunter (talk) 18:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. – zmbro (talk) 15:12, 9 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Charts, reviews, sales, and awards for the band's music are irrelevant here, so I'd cut them.
 * "Several" from "have recorded several unreleased songs" is a vast understatement.
 * Changed to many


 * Not very many songs are discussed in the lead, and I'd add some non-singles as well; this isn't supposed to be a singles discography article. Including some of their covers written by other artists could help add diversity.
 * Remove the "Indicates song released as a single" key from the tables; it makes them too singles-centric when "List of songs recorded by" doesn't exclusively refer to singles.
 * I've noted singles in most of my other song FLs so I don't think it's that big a deal here.

Let me know once the above is addressed. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:45, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * So you're basically saying I should rewrite most of it?, since cutting the entire first section would make it way too short. – zmbro (talk) 03:16, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Much of the lead, but not exactly all of it. Mentioning each album was a smart choice and I'd keep that in. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 10:33, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Alright I'll see what I can do. I'll re-ping you when I'm done. – zmbro (talk) 15:54, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. SNUGGUMS (talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 17:05, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. I'm glad you suggested I do that, I think it now better represents the band's music as a whole. I was able to expand upon many of their albums, and add in info about the Prospekt's March EP. Hope it's better. :-) – zmbro (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * That lead definitely looks better now, though you still haven't removed the key from tables indicating certain songs are singles; that gives them too much focus when this isn't supposed to be a singles discography. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 22:59, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. – zmbro (talk) 18:24, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I now support following sufficient improvements. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 20:40, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Source review passed ; promoting. -- Pres N  21:31, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


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