Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Diamond Rio 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 User:Scorpion0422 20:53, 22 November 2008 [1].

Diamond Rio discography

I have been working on this article for a few days now. After getting comments and suggestions from Jennavecia, TenPoundHammer, and Matthewedwards, I (and they) believe that it is FL worthy. I worked on this article to supplement the article Diamond Rio, which is a GA. Xclamation point 00:20, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose

• All charts need to be referenced by a reliable source

The Canadian Country chart needs to be referenced. And references should be added for the US charts in the compilations section. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 05:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fixed Xclamation point 23:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can the US references be more specific? -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 21:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I fixed them. Xclamation point 22:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The publisher is missing from most of the references
  • fixed Xclamation point 02:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Billboard in italics in some placed but not others? It's a magazine so it should be in italics. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 05:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed again. Xclamation point 17:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Guest contributions → Other appearances
  • fixed Xclamation point 18:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• U.S. → US
  • fixed Xclamation point 18:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Add catalog numbers for the albums
  • fixed Xclamation point 02:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Anymore information on Can't You Tell?
  • fixed Removed it completely, as according to MOS:DISCOG. Xclamation point 18:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• The link in the infobox for compilations doesn't take the reader down to the section
  • fixed Xclamation point 18:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• The other appearances section should be referenced as well
• Please provide direct links to the music video directors. See Cannibaloki's comment below. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 05:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-- Underneath-it-All (talk) 04:23, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still would like to see direct links to the music video directors, but everything else looks good. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 02:17, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The discography of Diamond Rio, an American
  studio albums, thirty-four singles, and two compilations
  . (The phrase does not add in anything, though I have used several times before, I think you could remove it and add more content to the text.)
  • fixed Xclamation point 19:51, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Take a look on {{
  Infobox Artist Discography
  }}
  • What about it? Xclamation point 18:16, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Where are the music videos? (See mtv.com for some examples);
  • done Added music videos. Xclamation point 19:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove Can't You Tell, is a unreleased album;
  • done Xclamation point 18:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Arista Nashville is overlinked;
  • fixed Xclamation point 18:16, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Compilation and specialty albums? Compilation albums;
  • fixed Xclamation point 19:51, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• RIAA what?
  • fixed Xclamation point 18:16, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• The band not released any video (such as VHS or DVD)?

• No. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 20:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Chart Positions to Peak chart positions
  • fixed Xclamation point 18:16, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• US Country and US, should be US and US country;
  • fixed Xclamation point 18:16, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• The references to the Canadian charts does not lead me to anywhere! You have to make reference to each position.
• "In God We Still Trust" > Failed to chart (Yes, I saw the empty space (—) in the table!)
  • fixed Xclamation point 18:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• "One More Day" also peaked at #6 on U.S. Hot Adult Contemporary Tracks.
  • These two notes are removing the beauty of the table (if it have any)
  • fixed Xclamation point 02:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Guest contributions or Other appearances?
  • "The following table denotes other contributions made by Diamond Rio for various compilation albums that were not directly related to the band." (Sorry, but I not understand this section)
    • That section is for contributions that they made to soundtracks, compilation albums, etc. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 20:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The peak position in this section is useless!
    • Not entirely, given that the "Workin' Man's Blues" cover charted. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 20:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – I think this discography was not yet ready for an FLC. See MOS:DISCOG, for now is only...

• http://wm05.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:0ifixql5ldae~T1 deadlinks
  • Nothing that a surgery does not resolve.
    • New link: http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:0ifixql5ldae~T10; Ah, for Allmusic links working correctly, you should click Send to Friend.
      loki 15:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
      ]
• Current refs 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 run the publisher into the link title. Better to put the publisher outside the link title.
  • Fixed 3, 4, 7, 8; 9 doesn't have much of a better title. Xclamation point 02:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Current ref 5 is in German and should say so in the reference
  • fixed Xclamation point 02:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• What makes http://lpdiscography.com/d/Rio/rio-sp.htm a reliable source?
  • Nothing!
    • Fixed, no longer a reference. Xclamation point 02:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• What makes http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/rpm/028020-110.01-e.php?q1=%22diamond+rio&x=0&y=0&sk=97&&&&&PHPSESSID=aok35q2u8cgqitmjd8564esfp4 a reliable source? It needs a publisher also (I suspect it's reliable but need to know who published it)
  • Yes, is a reliable source; X! needs to reference the positions one by one. (published by
    loki 15:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • It's the only source we have for that. The problem is that in order to find the peak, it involves checking every listing and finding the highest. In addition, referencing each position one by one will create about 20 extra similar refs. Xclamation point 03:00, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Will not just be like, the most important thing is that the references will lead the reader to the point. If you can avoid the search engines, why not do? Hmmm? (The same applies to the Music videos section). To give you less work in the search for references, instead of typing the name "Diamond Hill", use the names of albums and songs.
        loki 05:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • Could you clarify that? I seem to have misunderstood what you mean. Xclamation point 11:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - my review was addressed to comply with
  CO 23:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

1. Carrie Underwood discography is a good example. I've worked on it before.
2. Change it back! Country charts should be in the first column (or before the Hot 100 chart). They are country artists and other discographies all put country chart first.
3. I've fixed some reference, because one simple reference can replace many unuseful ones.
4. Any problem with AC charts? It should be notes only.
5. I've made comments on the talk pages also.

Langdon (talk) 06:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)i7114080[reply]

• comments. The album / compilation tables look very squat, with all that info piled into the one "release" box for each. can't some (or all) of that be seperated into seperate columns, eg. a column for release date and others. Then boxes would not look so vertically streched and wouldn't have to have "release date" written out each time. That's exactly what a table is good for! Would weak oppose now, based on layout, but would support if more columns added to those tables.Yobmod (talk) 21:47, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• That's the recommended format per MOS:DISCOG actually. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 15:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, but i don't think a proposed guideline should be reason to feature ugly lists. The guideline makes sense for tables that have a lot of chart results, so would be difficult to fit more columns into. In this case it would be senseless to force a (proposed) guideline to the detriment of an article. The AIR disclaimer on the page notwithstanding, the Discog guys seem more interested in creating one-size-fits-all rules, with no recognition that different artists have different outputs, so need different lists. Still opposing on style grounds.Yobmod (talk) 15:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support, with a few small notes:

• Why the small font for the info in the album column? Since it's bullet-pointed, the small font doesn't actually make the space any smaller, just the words harder to read.
• "which was a #2 on the country charts" weird passive voice. What about "which peaked at #2 on the country charts." Also, which country charts?

Other than that, looks great. Drewcifer (talk) 01:45, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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