Wikipedia:Peer review/Jimi Hendrix discography/archive1

Jimi Hendrix discography
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because it is the first step towards becoming a featured list candidate. It covers Hendrix's original recordings and is separate from the Jimi Hendrix posthumous discography submitted previously. It has been completely revised with the addition of new sections and many new sources within the last six months and more recently, thoroughly fact-checked. In response to comments regarding the posthumous discography, this is now extensively referenced with inline citations and goes beyond WP:DISCOGSTYLE and most FL discographies.

Comments have also been made about tendentious editing and vandalism to Jimi Hendrix articles. As one of the most popular rock figures of the late 1960s, Hendrix articles attract a lot of attention, both good and bad. However, they now seem to be relatively stable—Jimi Hendrix and Are You Experienced have been promoted to Featured Articles and additional Hendrix articles ("Little Wing" and Band of Gypsys) are nominated as GAs. I have the resources to make this a featured list and look forward to constructive comments/suggestions to make it happen.

Thanks, Ojorojo (talk) 21:40, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Jimknut
Support — looks good. Jimknut (talk) 17:02, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Note: This is a Peer Review, not a GAN, A-class or FLC, so "support" is not required. Save that for when it id nominated at FLC. Brianboulton (talk) 20:56, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Why do I have to save it? I see no harm in supporting it here as well as when or if it is a GAN, A-class or FLC. I think it's find to offer support with any improvement to an article or list. Jimknut (talk) 02:17, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, you don't have to save it; you can say "support" if you like. I think all Brian was saying is that "support" is usually given when the article is seeking a new status -- GA, A-class, or FA.  To say "support" here at PR doesn't really mean anything -- at the end of the PR, the article will either be improved or it won't be, but the article rating won't change as a result, so no consensus needs to be built.  If by "support" you just mean it's a good article, that's harmless, but it's likely to cause confusion among other editors who are familiar with these processes, so I'd suggest just giving your positive feedback directly, rather than saying "support". Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 13:27, 14 July 2014 (UTC)