Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Tinashe 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 Hawkeye7 via FACBot (talk) 18:43, 14 December 2015 (UTC).

Tinashe discography

 * Nominator(s):  Azealia 911  talk 11:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

This article details the discography of American R&B singer Tinashe, perhaps best known for her breakout single "2 On". Since then, she has gone on to collaborate with the likes of Iggy Azalea, Calvin Harris and Chris Brown. Thankyou for all comments in advance.  Azealia 911  talk 11:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Calvin999 Here are some quick initial comments at a glance


 * The lead looks disproportionate. One line, then a big para, then a short one. Try to a avoid one line paragraphs.
 * Done.  Azealia 911  talk


 * (including five as a featured artist and two promotional singles). → I'm not so sure that this is completely relevant or needed.
 * Removed.  Azealia 911  talk


 * In the singles table, I'm pretty sure you're only supposed to include U.S. and then one component which is in their genre, not five of the same country. Fore example, Mariah Carey singles discography is U.S. and U.S. R&B (as she is an R&B artist and has prolifically charted on it). Celine Dion singles discography has Canada and Canada A/C (she is an adult contemporary singer)
 * The closest thing we have to a discography MoS is WP:DISCOGSTYLE, which explicitly states any combination of charts can be used for artists, using their success on the chart as a common sense guideline.  Azealia 911  talk


 * Are HotNewHipHop and InTheMix reliable sources? I didn't think Muu Muse was, either. But maybe it is now.
 * Switched Muu Muse, the other two references don't bring up any red flags to me in terms of reliability.  Azealia 911  talk

— Calvin999 16:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments from IndianBio For the urls which require subscription, can you please have it as part of the cite web template itself? Use subscription=yes and it will auto generate the string. — Indian: BIO  [ ChitChat ] 16:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Done.  Azealia 911  talk

Comments from SNUGGUMS


 * "Hit" is too informal
 * Changed.  Azealia 911  talk


 * The first paragraph still seems really long compared to the second. I'd split it at the "The second single from Aquarius" point.
 * Split.  Azealia 911  talk


 * It seems redundant to use "failed to match" and "failing to enter" in the same sentence, maybe go with "'Pretend' was less commercially successful"
 * Changed.  Azealia 911  talk


 * "only just" is also repetitive and reads awkwardly, simply go with "only"
 * Changed.  Azealia 911  talk


 * "flopped commercially" → "was commercially unsuccessful"
 * Changed.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * "so far entering"..... just use "reaching"
 * Changed.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * Is "Zobbel" reliable? Either way, it shouldn't have the ".de" bit.
 * Yes, and removed.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * Don't italicize Pitchfork Media
 * Check the articles history, edits between Dan56 and Aria1561 suggest otherwise.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * Just realized today that the article uses italics itself. My bad; hadn't read it in a while. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 20:11, 28 October 2015 (UTC)


 * "TIME" shouldn't be fully capitalized
 * Changed.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk

Decent overall, but I can't support yet. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 03:59, 28 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments !  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 11:06, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You are quite welcome, Azealia, and I can now support this for FL. Well done. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 20:11, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thankyou!  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 20:12, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Eurofan88
 * I don't think "Vulnerable" was released as a single. I mean she never said it's a single. It's like Taylor Swift's "You Are In Love", available on iTunes but was never announced as a single.
 * Someone 'never said it's a single' is irrelevant. It received singles release on iTunes, while Taylor Swift announced that all of the Target bonus tracks would be released as iTunes singles.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * Iggy Azalea's "Impossible Is Nothing" was also released on iTunes but the article says it's a promo single. You reviewed that article but didn't tell the nominator to change it as a Single instead of Promo single.
 * That's because it was released as an instant-grat track, was the track of the week on iTunes for free at one point, hence followed the conventions of a promotional single. "Party Favors" meets none of these criteria, and I can't find any sources naming the song as a promotional single.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * Okay fine. A few months ago when i asked you if a song remix which is available on iTunes is a single you said yes. Tinashe's remix for "Jealous" was released on iTunes as a single. So are you going to add it in the 'As featured artist' section?
 * Done.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * I've reverted my edit, I can't find the Jealous remix single anywhere on iTunes, only in an EP with multipe remixes.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * Never mind, found it lol.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * Anyway i wish there was a consensus at the WP:Discographies if we should count songs remixes as singles or not :/ I pay too much attention to this kind of issues :D

I agree, do you have any other comments for me to address?  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * Only the remix version of "All Hands on Deck" features Iggy Azalea, so i guess it's not necessary to mention Azalea as a featured artist. Plus she shot a music video for her solo version.
 * Azalea is credited in all the chart history from the US, Australia and the UK. So if I remove her name, I'd have to only report on the solo charting history, which was one chart, the rhythmic chart.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * Why not to mention "Body Language" and "Drop That Kitty" in the lead, as they are the only two sperate articles of songs where she's a featured artist.
 * It didn't seem completely relevant to her career. Drop That Kitty flopped dreadfully and Body Language wasn't a huge worldwide success so it didn't seem necessary to include.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * Why UK R&B Singles Chart is not linked in the lead?
 * Linked.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * Travi$ Scott, A$AP Rocky → Travis Scott, ASAP Rocky; no need stylizations. --Eurofan88 (talk) 07:02, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Changed.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * Is that really necessary to mention singers and rappers' nationality in the lead every time? Also 'and featured' is used too many there, try changing it up like: 'and featured a guest verse/appearance from' for example.
 * Removed nationalities, switched up "and featured".  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * Remove "Dollar Signs" from the section 'Guest appearances'. It's already under the 'Other charted songs'.
 * It's deliberately in both sections, Guest appearances are non-single collaborations, it happened to chart as well so it's listed in both. This is common in discography articles.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * "Party Favors" was commercially unsuccessful, failing to enter any worldwide charts. If that song flopped then no need to write about it with separate sentence.
 * Leaving it at just "The first was titled "Party Favors"" felt too short, plus the sentence about "Player" faring much better on the charts would also need changing to the very general """Player" entered...". It's fine.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * music charts? oh come on Azealia, remove that music, it's not like the other times when you used just charts they were not music charts lol.
 * Done.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * Thankyou for your comments !  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 11:06, 28 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Support looks fine to me! Though i would still change some things, but i won't mind to see this as a featured list as i like her songs. :) --Eurofan88 (talk) 19:56, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments from GagaNutella It looks great after the edits above. Now I think you need to add her music videos in this article. Here are some FL examples you can follow: Gotye discography, M.I.A. discography, LMFAO discography. Gaga Nutella talk 18:09, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd respectfully decline to do so. Music videos should technically not be apart of a discography. By definition a discography is "a descriptive catalogue of musical recordings", of which music videos are not. If I see a FL with music videos already in I just tend to ignore them as a rule of thumb and will not remove them, but adding them seems redundant to this type of article. If she ever releases enough to make her own videography, perhaps I'll add them there, or even to her main bio article in the filmography section. I again bring up the closest thing discographies have to a MoS, WP:DISCOGSTYLE which doesn't mention music videos at all.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 18:16, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There really is no requirement for including videos. However, remember that directors and release years would of course need citations if videos are listed. I personally wouldn't include videos when already listed in a videography. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 20:15, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I can't see anything such in the discographies of Katy Perry and Lady Gaga 'cause they both have thier respective pages for their videographies. --  Frankie talk 23:00, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I just said that because I've seen many articles which include the videography. You can't just compare Gaga and Katy, who have a BIG VIDEOGRAPHY and global success, to Tinashe, who is getting fame now. I'm not saying x is better than y, but is like compared Madonna's videography, sales and other aspects, who is on music industry for more than 30 years to Gaga and Katy who have less than 10 years. Whatever, I support this list because despite this, I thinks it's all right. PS: If I knew my comment would cause all this trouble, I definitely wouldn't have come here. Like I said, I don't like to review discographies. I just did it for consideration to Azealia who reviewed our FLC and asked me on my talk page. So long! Gaga Nutella talk 00:13, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments from FrB.TG


 * Support – with my comments addressed, I can endorse it now. --  Frankie talk 11:53, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thankyou!  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 11:55, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment by Godot13 - lead image needs Alt text.--Godot13 (talk) 04:55, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It already had it.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 07:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes it did, my apologies and my error.--Godot13 (talk) 08:15, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem!  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 11:48, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Adabow
 * The infobox picture is not very helpful in establishing who the artist is and what she looks like. Is there a better one?
 * Swapped.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * There are subjective comments which form original research, such as "was a commercial success" and "commercially unsuccessful".
 * Removed OR comments.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk


 * The number of similar charts is ridiculous at some points. There are five US singles charts listed, including Digital Songs (a component of Hot 100) and R&B Songs (a subset of R&B/Hip Hop Songs). I can understand having a country's main chart and perhaps one genre chart, but anything more is superfluous. Consider that tables of peak chart positions in song articles shouldn't contain these minor subsets per WP:USCHARTS; it seems even more bizarre to list them here.
 * I've removed The R&B Songs and Digital Songs charts.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * Can there be some sort of consistency between different tables? Adabow (talk) 07:03, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * In what sense?  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 07:58, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * US,US R&B/Hip Hop, US R&B, AUS, AUS urban for albums versus US, US R&B/Hip Hop, US rhythmic, AUS for singles versus US R&B Digital for promo singles versus US dance for other charted songs. Why are they different in every section?
 * Why on earth would I include charts in sections that she didn't chart in?  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 08:36, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying you should include entire columns of em dashes, but pick a number chart types and use them throughout (perhaps exception for other charted songs). If a chart is not relevant for a given section, just remove the column. Basically, what I'm saying is to remove US R&B from albums. I thought "2 On" would've appeared on the Australian Urban chart but upon a closer look it seems that ARIA doesn't consider it an urban single. Strange... Adabow (talk)
 * Done.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 18:24, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Not all website titles should be italicised per MOS:T.
 * How do you propose I fix this?  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk
 * Deitalicise names of organisations which do not produce original content, such as the iTunes Store and HotNewHipHop (which, by the way, should be replaced with a more reliable source if possible). Adabow (talk) 07:03, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand what you were requesting, what I'm asking is, how do I do that?  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 07:58, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Use the  parameter of citation templates instead of the   one. Adabow (talk) 04:08, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Per cite web, "Do not use the publisher parameter for the name of a work". Before suggestion arises, I can't use No italics, or manually use markup to change the display either.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 08:36, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Never mind for now, then. I've asked a question about this at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 10, in case anyone's interested. Adabow (talk) 21:12, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Adabow (talk) 03:22, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thankyou for your comments, .  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 09:16, 14 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Director question – Has Adabow's comment about table consistency/removal of the US R&B chart from a table been addressed in any way? Giants2008  ( Talk ) 18:20, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes.  Azealia 911  <sub style="color:blue;">talk 18:24, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Giants2008 ( Talk ) 00:02, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.