Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Selena Gomez discography/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) 00:31, 31 July 2016 (UTC).

Selena Gomez discography

 * Nominator(s): SennKev (talk) 12:04, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

This article details the discography of American singer Selena Gomez. I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria and I believe the article is well-referenced and well-written.
 * I would support this article if the lead was in fact "well-referenced", which it's not. It has a mere three references for four entire bodies, and has quite errors.
 * You need an extra space in between "Come & Get It" and "which reached the top 10..." in the lead's third paragraph
 * Certifications (Gold, Silver, etc.) should not be capitalized when mentioned in the lead, so "certified Gold by the RIAA." --> "certified gold by the RIAA." in each instance this appears.
 * I am confused as to why the first two paragraphs of the lead discuss her work with The Scene, yet there is no mention of it in the article. And since it shouldn't be mentioned in the article, I don't see the need for the first two paragraphs.
 * If you cite sources for each statement in the lead without one, I might change my mind, but for now, I do not support this FLC. Carbrera (talk) 06:10, 6 July 2016 (UTC).
 * I am confused as to why the first two paragraphs of the lead discuss her work with The Scene, yet there is no mention of it in the article. And since it shouldn't be mentioned in the article, I don't see the need for the first two paragraphs.
 * If you cite sources for each statement in the lead without one, I might change my mind, but for now, I do not support this FLC. Carbrera (talk) 06:10, 6 July 2016 (UTC).
 * If you cite sources for each statement in the lead without one, I might change my mind, but for now, I do not support this FLC. Carbrera (talk) 06:10, 6 July 2016 (UTC).


 * Is it okay now ? Thanks for your review. --SennKev (talk) 9:35, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Support, everything checks out with me now. Carbrera (talk) 16:18, 7 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I now support the article. If you're not too busy, it would be appreciated if you left a review on my FLC Thanks – jona  ✉ 23:17, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

I believe the article meets the FL criteria, and happy to support it. Mymis (talk) 12:04, 12 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your support! --SennKev (talk) 12:08, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

At least for now, I oppose this nomination. Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:10, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The lead is entirely US-centric and doesn't take into account her success in any other nations
 * Band work is better for her bio or band's main page
 * Planned musical hiatus is also better for Selena's main bio
 * If talking about opening sales in lead, then just stick with pure sales rather than figures that include streams
 * Unless they were singles, promo singles, or songs that happened to chart anywhere, none of the "Other appearances" entries really belong here and would be better for a page of songs she has recorded
 * Music videos really shouldn't use rowspans; they hinder accessibility in instances like this
 * If talking about opening sales in lead, then just stick with pure sales rather than figures that include streams
 * Unless they were singles, promo singles, or songs that happened to chart anywhere, none of the "Other appearances" entries really belong here and would be better for a page of songs she has recorded
 * Music videos really shouldn't use rowspans; they hinder accessibility in instances like this
 * Music videos really shouldn't use rowspans; they hinder accessibility in instances like this
 * Music videos really shouldn't use rowspans; they hinder accessibility in instances like this


 * Thanks for your comments! Is it okay now ? I have changed many things... Could you please check ? --SennKev (talk) 20:12, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's looking better, but the referencing still needs work as Mymis pointed out earlier. Print publications like Billboard and Entertainment Weekly need to be italicized in all instances while web-only publications (except for online-only magazines/newspapers) such as iTunes and Disney.com shouldn't be at all. Additionally, "zobbel.de" isn't a reliable source, "officialcharts.com" should be "Official Charts Company", and there's a dead link. All publications should only be linked in the first ref they are used (i.e. just link Billboard in ref#3, and Recorded Music NZ in ref#50). The use of publication owners/publishers (i.e. Prometheus Global Media, The Walt Disney Company) has also been largely deprecated for a while. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:31, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review ! Not sure but I think it's great now. --SennKev (talk) 22:46, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * E! shouldn't have italics, and only link Recorded Music NZ in its first instance within refs (that would be ref#50, unlink it in ref's #54 and #57). Link Consequence of Sound. Snuggums (talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 22:54, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks you so much ! I hope it's great...  --SennKev (talk) 23:27, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I see no more glaring issues and can now support this for FL. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 00:18, 12 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your support! --SennKev (talk) 12:08, 12 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Source review


 * Formatting: Any title that uses ALLCAPS for wording should be corrected to title case (e.g. ref 7 SELENA GOMEZ -> Selena Gomez). Ref 1: E! should be linked.
 * Spotchecks: checked refs 7, 21, 38, 71 - all clean
 * Completeness: nothing obviously missing.

Two small issues to fix before passing. -- Pres N  17:24, 29 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review ! I think it's great now. --SennKev (talk) 9:39, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay, promoting. -- Pres N  00:24, 31 July 2016 (UTC)


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