Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Bill Clinton audio files

Bill Clinton audio files

 * Reason: These files are all audio files that correspond to recent video FS promotions. They meet all Featured sound criteria.  As I have said in other nominations, the reader often is unable to use video technology and even if he is may be on a slow connection where the significantly smaller audio files are more valuable to him.


 * Creator: U.S. Government/Miller Center
 * Articles in which this recording appears: Lewinsky: History of the United States (1991–present), Impeachment of Bill Clinton, Lewinsky scandal, Presidency of Bill Clinton NAFTA: Bill Clinton, North American Free Trade Agreement, Presidency of Bill Clinton Inauguration: Bill Clinton, Federal holidays in the United States, First inauguration of Bill Clinton, Presidency of Bill Clinton, United States presidential inauguration

Not promoted Pointless waste of time. — James (Talk • Contribs) • 5:27pm • 07:27, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Nominate and support. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * While I understand why you are doing this, I am not sure I can support making every audio only version of our videos a FS. The best version of these is the video. No doubt that these should be created but I have some reservations to duplicating works verbatim. --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  18:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * For a portion of our readers videos are not viable. Although these may be lacking added benefits of visual presentation, they should be evaluated against WP:WIAFS and passed if they meet the standards.  There are numerous types of content for which we have multiple versions (that each depict the content differently to the reader) of nearly identical content regardless of whether one is better than the other.  If both meet our FS criteria, both should be FS.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:28, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm most uncomfortable on this doubling up. Both video and audio can be uploaded to Commons/WP, but why must both be featured sounds? Tony   (talk)  09:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It is not that both must be. It is possible for one to be featured and the other not.  However, I feel we must evaluate nominees against WP:WIAFS.  If both pass the criteria and contribute differently to the audiences of WP readers, both should be promoted.  I am not starting a revolution, just suggesting that both be fairly evaluated against WIAFS.  If you have ever participated at WP:GAC and WP:GAR, you might be familiar with the concept of the criteria.  If people fail an article for reasons not in the criteria, you are suppose to seek a ruling having the decision overturned at GAR.  All candidates must be evaluated against the criteria.  If a video passes the criteria, it is possible (if not likely) that the audio passes the same criteria.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Suspended per Wikipedia talk:Featured sound candidates. — James (Talk • Contribs) • 4:44pm • 06:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)