Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Sonic Youth discography
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 23:20, 16 May 2008.
[edit] Sonic Youth discography
This is a big one! I've been working on this for a couple weeks now, and I think it's ready at long last. Sonic Youth have had an obscene number of releases throughout the years, so I had to take a few liberties here and there. Namely, the charts-table having top and bottom headings, and the lead prose being very listy. As always, any comments and suggestions are appreciated. Thanks! Drewcifer (talk) 00:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Resolved stuff from Burningclean 02:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Cool, I've been waiting for this one!
- The opening sentenece, no need to follow this, but could you possibly make it like the openers for most discographies? "The following" sounds kinda weird to me. Maby you just want the change, I don't know. You can leave it if you want.
-
- Do you have any suggestions? Most of the discographies of worked on so far start like that. But I'm open to suggestions...
- Nope, actually on a second thought I probably like this better.
- Do you have any suggestions? Most of the discographies of worked on so far start like that. But I'm open to suggestions...
- "Sonic Youth was signed as the first act on Neutral Records label Neutral Records" Woah! My brain went numb with this sentence! Reword, or fix?
- "Sister' and the double LP Daydream Nation, to increasing critical accliam and exposure." This is screwed up, the end is in italics.
- "In 1990 the album resigned once again to Geffen, and released Goo the same year." The band resigned to Geffen?
-
- Yea, the lead definately needed a copyedit. I took care of all of the above.
- No certifications?
-
- Not one.
- Why is there an extra country listing at the end of the studio albums?
-
- Because they have so many releases, it takes up more than one screen. So if you're trying to figure out how Sonic Nurse did in France, for example, you wouldn't be able to tell which column France is since it's off screen. So I added a second one at the bottom. Make sense?
- Very much so.
- Because they have so many releases, it takes up more than one screen. So if you're trying to figure out how Sonic Nurse did in France, for example, you wouldn't be able to tell which column France is since it's off screen. So I added a second one at the bottom. Make sense?
- ""—" denotes releases that did not chart." Can that be added to the chart just like Metallica discography?
-
- I prefer to keep it outside of table. See any of the other discogs I've worked on.
- No charts beyond the studio albums?
-
- Nope.
- All of the notes columns are kinda goofy width-wise. Maby seperate sentences with a <br />.
-
- I'm not sure what you mean. They're all set to 400 px. Any rows in particular look wierd?
- Video releases (only a little bit) and Sonic Youth Recordings (SYR) series. Burningclean [speak] 16:15, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
- IE strikes again. It looks fine in Firefox, but for some reason IE doesn't handle wikitables very well. I keep forgetting that. I fixed all the column widths, but also noticed a few things don't show up correctly on IE. Mainly, the lef to cells in the bottom chart headers in the album table should be invisible, and some of the column headers in the Singles table aren't center aligned. Do you have any experience fixing that for IE?
- If it shows up on other browsers without a problem then I think it is fine. It isn't anything major. Burningclean [speak] 02:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
- IE strikes again. It looks fine in Firefox, but for some reason IE doesn't handle wikitables very well. I keep forgetting that. I fixed all the column widths, but also noticed a few things don't show up correctly on IE. Mainly, the lef to cells in the bottom chart headers in the album table should be invisible, and some of the column headers in the Singles table aren't center aligned. Do you have any experience fixing that for IE?
- Video releases (only a little bit) and Sonic Youth Recordings (SYR) series. Burningclean [speak] 16:15, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean. They're all set to 400 px. Any rows in particular look wierd?
- The directors column in the music videos is messed up. <br />?
-
- Done.
That's all. Burningclean [speak] 01:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Support Another great list. Good work. Burningclean [speak] 02:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Comment "Touch Me I'm Sick/Halloween" has its own page. Where did you get chart info for albums/singles that charted worse than #40 in the UK? everyhit lists only top 40 AFAIK. indopug (talk) 06:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- Good eye! It was a bit of a mental error on my part. Found a second source beyond 40, cited it, and double checked all the entries. Drewcifer (talk) 06:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Matthew
Comments
- Don't wikilink the title in the lead, per WP:LS#Bold lead
-
- Fixed.
- Other discogs wikilink studio albums, extended plays, compilations, singles, music videos, bootlegs, and soundtracks in the lead
-
- Ficed.
- Most discogs I've seen put ""—" denotes releases that did not chart" in a row in the table.
-
- Give or take half of them do that. I'm not fond of it, myself.
- I'd also like to see it before the table, otherwise readers might think what the hell does this mean?
-
- I think this is more of a WP:Discog issue, no?
- Is there no notable notes for the EPs that don't currently have them?
-
- Added one to Silvers Sessions, not really sure what to put with Master-Dik though.
- Can Video releases and Music videos be closer together, instead of being separated by how many other sections?
-
- Moved two sections closer.
- Isn't "official bootleg" an oxymoron?
-
- Technically, I guess kind of. But that's what they're called. Check out the Sonic Youth website. I think they mean bootleg in that it is lower-audio fidelity and not original material.
- In the Singles table, what country is "Mod rock" for?
":Fixed.
- No singles chart positions for any other countries?
-
- Nope, that's it.
- There is more music videos than there is singles. Is this right?
-
- That's right. They've made some videos for a bunch of non-single songs.
That's all I got -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 04:50, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
One more As this is the English Wikipedia, I'd like to see the chart positions for English speaking countries be grouped together before non-English speaking countries (both alphabetised), with the band's home country first, and the World charts if available last. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 04:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Comment to Matthewedwards I think UK/US should come before all other English-speaking countries in the charts. These are the two most important markets in terms of marketing, sales, promotion, media coverage etc. indopug (talk) 07:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Actually guys, the way I've always done it is the following order: home country then descending by chart success. So, take for example David Hasselhoff. I would argue that the two most important countries as far as his chart performance goes are the US (his home country) and Germany (where he's practically worshiped). Perhaps (and I don't know this, but let's just assume for the sake of argument), that Hasselhoff has charted very poorly in the UK. Should the UK came before Germany? I would argue no, since it would be a logical mistake to put Hasselhoff's popularity in the UK before his uber-success in Germany, simply because the UK speaks English and Germany speaks German. Does that make sense? Drewcifer (talk) 07:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Actually I was opposed to the idea of chart listings even having a set order as per Matthewedwards; its unnecessary at best and at worst, well, the Hasselhoff case. I mentioned about the US and UK only because I was afraid Matthew's suggestion would become a standard requirement for all discogs. I think the columns are fine in any order after the first 2 or 3 most important ones. Also requiring the nominators to now shift around the columns might cause inadvertent errors. indopug (talk) 12:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Surely for us to put forward what we think as the most important is verging on WP:NPOV? As pointed out by User:Kollision, WP:CHART say it should be the artist's home country, followed by all others in alphabetical order. My suggestion is that as this is the English language Wikipedia, we put the English langage charts in alphabetical order after the home country, then list the non-English language charts in alphabetical order. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- I have copied this part of the conversation to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies/style so the Project folk can participate. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Actually I was opposed to the idea of chart listings even having a set order as per Matthewedwards; its unnecessary at best and at worst, well, the Hasselhoff case. I mentioned about the US and UK only because I was afraid Matthew's suggestion would become a standard requirement for all discogs. I think the columns are fine in any order after the first 2 or 3 most important ones. Also requiring the nominators to now shift around the columns might cause inadvertent errors. indopug (talk) 12:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Neutral Only because I won't be around for two weeks and will be unable to see this out. Sorry. Hope my comments helped, though. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Comment There are rather few citations/references in the lead. Tompw (talk) (review) 16:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Comment
- The last paragraph of the lead is unreferenced.
- The information in that paragraph is repeated further down, and I'm not sure that's entirely necessary to repeat that lead information in the SYR section.
-
- Agreed, took it out.
- There are a lot of albums, songs, etc. in the latter lists that don't have articles. If they're notable, it would be useful to at least create stubs to start the process of creating them, and to make the list more useful.
-
- I agree, but I'm honestly not that knowledgeable about Sonic Youth, so I'll leave that some that is.
- Great image for the infobox, btw.
Support - good list. Marrio (talk) 22:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Comments
- The charts should be alphabetical order, although I suggest UK to be second after US.
- Daydream Nation didn't chart? DAYDREAM NATION!!?? But seriously maybe the websites only list info after 1990, so is there any way to double-check? Surely the 20th edition deluxe edition charted?
- The catalogue numbers don't need to be in small, it just makes it harder to read, nothing else. Also, the label's code is unnecessary along with number as it seems to just repeat the name of the record label. Make sure the labels are linked the first time
- I created the "Touch Me I'm Sick/Halloween" page, that's why I could point it out. :D and neat thing you did with the bottom of the albums table.
- Lead: The "In 1990 the band resigned once again to Geffen..." paragraph could be made bigger I think, since they released their most successful albums then, so give it the "this album charted this much" treatment for Goo, Dirty and Jet Set. Also mention their most popular singles, "Kool Thing" and "100%". You should also mention that Daydream Nation is a landmark alternative album.
That's all I have, great work on such an important band. indopug (talk) 08:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
- Generally well-written. Formatting: I've noticed tons of em dashes in the blank squares of tables in other FLCs. Rather ugly, don't you think? I've changed the top row to en dashes—aren't they a little more attractive? Please change the rest if you don't disagree. Probably a global search and replace in Word is the easiest way. TONY (talk) 11:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- If I'm not mistaken, the em dash is meant to describe a lack of something, at least in tables. This isn't specified in any MOS thing, but I believe this is just a normal (ie not Wikipedia-exlusive) grammar thing. I'll dig up my MLA style book and see what I can find. For now, however, I'm going to revert the dashes back to the em-dashes, and move this discussion over to MOS:DISCOG since this is something way beyond the scope of this one list. Cool? Drewcifer (talk) 00:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Ref 2: author not listed .... Doesn't appear to support the statement to which it's appended in the lead. I hope Ref 1 is good—it's used about a dozen times in a row in the lead. TONY (talk) 13:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if I follow you completely. There's two citations since neither describes fully what's in the rarities release, but together they do. Maybe you were confused since the link was to a redirect? I fixed that, as well as added the author. Drewcifer (talk) 00:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Question How come Canada's album chart isn't included (it is on some other discographies), is it because it didn't chart there? Should the major charts their albums haven't charted on be noted? -- Scorpion0422 22:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Wouldn't it be a little unneccessary to mention charts an album didn't chart on? Surely the list of charts one doesn't chart on is a much bigger list then those they did? Drewcifer (talk) 22:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Support Another list I can't find a problem with. Noble Story (talk) 02:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
