Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Ciara discography/archive1

Add links
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 not promoted by Dabomb87 15:10, 13 August 2010 [1].

Ciara discography

[edit]

Ciara discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Candyo32 14:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC) [reply]

In transforming the discog from this to this, I now believe that the article satisfies MOS:DISCOG, and is up to par with other FL's. Everything is understandable and comprehensive, doing justice to the representation of Ciara, as well as removing unnecessary fancruft and other unneeded information. Candyo32 14:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Lil-unique1 (talk) 14:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
'Resolved Comments
  • instead of having seperate links for singles and albums, you can use just one reference. E.g. this link would work for the Dutch (albums and singles) and, this can be done for all charts on Hung Medien
not done Well is there anything really wrong with using separate links for each respective country? Although it isn't needed here, the respective site provides the chart history for that album/single in the country, if the user wanted to look further into it. Candyo32 03:29, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Its undue redundency. Why have two seperate links from Hung Medien for singles and albums when the website can provide one link which suffices? E.g. 21 and 24 could easily be merged --Lil-unique1 (talk) 03:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well it is used by Pink discography, Lily Allen discography, and Rihanna discography. Candyo32 04:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly my point (bar Rihanna discography which has really let go recently with the mad fans) Pink discography used the one discography/overview hungmedien link for virtually each of the countries accept Netherlands. For me that's the only other issue otherwise I think I'm happy to give my vote of approval (I'll need to re-read the intro to be 100% certain)--Lil-unique1 (talk) 04:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okey dokeyy. Candyo32 04:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref 1, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 14, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40 - 53 → all of these work fields in the {{cite web}} need unitalicizing per the MoS because they are not publications, magazines, newspapers or TV shows.
doneAll except 19 (publication), 14 (wasn't italicized).
You've missed some. 18, 20, 21, 24, 26, 36 and 37 still need unitaliczing.
done - Oops look like I got too happy lol. 20 (wasn't italicized),
  • ref 26 needs fixing → look at the ref in the list and you'll see what I mean.
done
  • Other MoS such as WP:OVERLINK applies therefore this should to be resolved in the refs.
done
Not done! all music is still overlinked at least 5 times, oricon at least once (in ref 19)
done - Oops look like I got too happy lol.
  • WP:OVERLINK needs to be address in the music video section.
done
  • If Ciara appears in "Calling All Girls", "Hey Young Girl" and "Vibrate" it need sourcing.
done
done Candyo32 03:29, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
the only thing I'd say is Pink's discog lists certificates for featured singles. Are there any for Ciara? --Lil-unique1 (talk) 04:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking about that, but I was weary of adding them since the Rihanna discog didn't include them. But after seeing them on Pink and on Gwen Stefani, I see it could be included. Candyo32 04:50, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Yup I would include them, generally I wouldn't use Rihanna discography as a good example of FL standard it has slipped a little. Whereas Gwen and Pink has regular editors who maintain their standards thus they're better measures of good FL. I am happy to give my support for moving this is to FL though I think a copy edit of the intro is required. I would also change the comment "consists of four studio albums to three" because Basic Instinct has yet to be released (it may never see the light of day). It would be better to say, "Ciara's fourth studio album, Basic Instinct is pending release in August 2010". --Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll make fixes. And ugh, dont mention it. I'm hearing October 5th now. I'm afraid we'll be on a Fantasy Ride again. Candyo32 18:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
:( Poor Basic Instinct. ugh, I'll make the fixes to the lead & tables. Candyo32 14:51, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also I've just noticed that column widths for the charts should be formatted using !style="width:3em;font-size:75%;"| rather than style=width="30"| as this automatically allows one's web browser to automatically adjust column widths to match the screen resolution. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:21, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Discography Issues (Resolved) L-l-CLK-l-l
-
  • ref [2] → Nielsen Business Media, Inc.. extra period done
  • ref [5] → work=About.com publisher= The New York Times Company done
  • ref [9] → work= Allmusic publisher= Rovi Corporation not done done
  • ref [10] → Retrieved May 21, 2008 inconsistent dates not done done
  • ref [13] → Retrieved March 17, 2007 inconsistent dates done
  • ref [15] → remove italics done
  • ref [16] → work= Allmusic publisher= Rovi Corporation and remove italics not done done
  • ref [35] → work= Allmusic publisher= Rovi Corporation done
  • ref [36] → work= Allmusic publisher= Rovi Corporation done
  • ref [37] → extra period after Apple inc done
  • ref [38] + [39] → extra period after Muze inc not done done
  • ref [40] → extra period after Amazon Inc done
  • ref [41] + [42] → work= Allmusic publisher= Rovi Corporation done
  • ref [44] → extra period after Muze inc not done done

Oppose - some basic issues...

  • And singles is inconsistent in the infobox... if this is entirely the discog, shouldn't the infobox reflect the list?
not done Per other FL's all singles are stated in the lead, but only solo are in the infobox.
Not sure (a) this is true or (b) if this should be the way it is anyway, very misleading. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ehh, I'm just going by other FL discographies. Although they are singles they aren't her solo singles.
Repeat - shouldn't the infobox be consistent with the lead? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:26, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bursting onto the scene in 2004 hailed " reads like a tabloid.
Somewhat done, while I'll change "bursting onto the scene" to debuting, as The Princess of Crunk&B is an American music honorific title, hailed can be used.
The reword is better but "hailed" is still very odd here. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link certified appropriately.
??
Link certified to a relevant article which talks about record certification. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "top five" hyphenate.
??
top-five. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "US top five hits and international performers "Lose Control", " I don't get this, what do you "international performers"?
The song's performed in international markets?
Unclear, should be reworded. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which saw her remain consistent to her urban roots, and R&B and hip-hop driven dance while experimenting with old school songs combined with huge pop hooks" urban roots, experimenting with old school, huge pop... this isn't a review of her work, it's an encyclopedia, this needs toning down and neutralising.
not done I'm just taking excerpts of what critics have said and its no way to say it other wise. While using old school music she incorporated pop hooks and used R&B and hip-hop dance music? Candyo32 03:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If critics say this directly, fine, quote them and reference the quotation, otherwise use less tabloid language. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So it's supposed to read "R&B" and "hip-hop" "dance" while using "old school" sounds and "huge pop hooks." ? Candyo32 01:09, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, of course not, R&B, hip-hop and dance are statements of fact, "old school" however is colloquial and subjective and "huge pop hooks" is opinion. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:26, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ""Just Stand Up!."" avoid the repeated full stop.
not done Not understanding the problem.
Don't need a . after a ! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:26, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's the lead. I'll review the rest once this lot is resolved. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:09, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
*Lead says three albums, infobox says 4.
done
  • "Ciara sold over seven" -> "Ciara had sold over seven"
not done With the use of the predecessor term "Prior", then it is understood that Ciara sold this many in the past.
That's not what I'm getting at, it would read better with "had". The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
done
  • Merge sentences two and three with a "while".
done
  • vocalst typo.
done
  • "as well as dubbed the " perhaps grammatically correct, but actually "as well as being dubbed the" would read a whole load better to me.
done
  • "female counterpart of Chris Brown." I don't really understand the significance of this comparison. Nor would other non-experts.
not done As comparisons to Janet Jackson and Aaliyah were noted for singing and dancing, Chris Brown is noted for his dancing skills, which Ciara is compared to, spurring from their dual reflecting performance at the 2008 BET Awards, in given source.
Then this sentence is confusing because you mention both comparisons for dancing and singing and it's unclear to whom the comparisons are made. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The part mentinoning Brown is with the dancing, singing comparisons are in the following sentence.
  • "[6][7][3][8]" can we keep refs in numerical order?
done Just as a note, it's kind of hard when you don't know what number the refs are when editing. lol.
  • "multi-platinum in the United States, Platinum" platinum or Platinum?
done
  • "The album had similar success that Goodies had" poor grammar - had.. had...
done
  • "[3][1]" see above comment re ordering.
done
  • "Although it did not contain an international hit as her debut..." I don't understand this.
As noted in the previous paragraph, Goodies contained the international hits "Goodies", "1,2 Step" and "Oh", while Ciara: The Evolution did not contain a international hit.
Perhaps you need a "as her debut did" (i.e. a "did") then. Otherwise this doesn't make sense. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
done
  • "the second "Promise" was" was there a first "Promise"? I think we need some punctuation here to help...
done
  • " Ciara took part as a featured artists in songs" she's a solo artist so she couldn't be "a featured artists"
I guess done if you mean change it to featured artist, but if you mean otherwise not done because a solo artist will become a featured if they are featured on another artists' solo track
  • "After three years..." be specific. What year? Three years after what?
done
  • "remaining with her trademark R&B and hip-hop sound, the work also went towards a mainstream pop and dance direction, as well as dabbling..." more tabloidism.
not done As before critics said while using her basic sound she used pop and dance music.
Who said it was "trademark R&B"? "dabbling" is hardly encyclopedic. Re-write. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Somewhat done while I'll change dabbling, trademark is a common word meaning a distinctive sign by an individual, and this is R&B for Ciara.
  • "193,000 copes" typo.
done
  • "Although the album was a disappointment" POV - it didn't sell well, it wasn't a disappointment.
Somewhat done well it is what it is but I'll add "commercial disappointment", "compared to her previous releases" to make NPOV
  • Last sentence in lead unreferenced.
Somewhat done Neither are the other releases chartings in the article because they are listed below? But fixing to include peak.

Oppose It looks like a lot of work is needed to achieve consistency in the article, in terms of references, prose, content etc. I will outline a few.

  • Lead — In the first line, released since 2004 seems undue. The second paragraph is the one which should have followed the lead sentence. And all the extra info regarding the sales stuff comes at the last. This is a discography, not a sales estimate. You should put her music to the front instead of commercial reception.
  • Lead — I see you have five paragraphs in the lead, try to reduce it to four paras per WP:LEAD.
  • As well as a vocalist, Ciara is known for being an accomplished dancer, garnering comparisons to Janet Jackson and Aaliyah,[3] as well as being dubbed the female counterpart of Chris Brown.[4] She is also noted for her whispery soprano vocal style, also compared to Jackson. — Seriously, what is the need of these sentences in an article about discography? It talks about Ciara as a musician, and her styles and accomplishments. This is more suited for the biography page, rather here.
  • Debuting in 2004, hailed with the honorific title, "The Princess or First Lady of Crunk&B,"[3][6][7][8] her debut album, — consecutive usage of debut makes for an unprofessional writing. Better would be to have the honorific claim later when you talk about the reception of Goodies.
  • Ciara also participated in her most successful collaborations — Refrain from using PEACOCKY words liek most success, you can simply reitereate it as "Ciara also participated in a number of successful collaborations, including... [names]"
  • Having the similar success that Goodies had, Ciara: The Evolution debuted at number one on the Billboard — on the Billboard what?
  • and charting in the top thirty of most international markets, reaching Platinum status in the US,[10] and selling around two million copies worldwide.[1][3] — I find it very difficult to navigate through such sentences. You begin with a Billboard charting, then move to international charting, then come back to US certification, then move back to worldwide sales. Its haphazard and out of tune.
  • Top twenty US and moderate international performer "Like a Boy" was also released — Gives the impression as if "Like a Boy" was a top twenty US success and then it was released.
  • Three years after the second release, Ciara released her third album, Fantasy Ride, while remaining with her trademark R&B and hip-hop sound, the work also went towards a mainstream pop and dance direction, as well as using with soul influences. — Please chop the sentence.
  • lacking certifications, — is not an indication that an album is unsuccessful commercially. Eminem's Relapse has sold 2 million copies per Soundscan, but remains uncertified. Would you call it a disappointment in this market era?
  • Although the album was a commercial disappointment compared ot her previous releases — You just said it in the previous line.
  • It will be preceded by the single "Ride" featuring Ludacris — "Ride" has already been released.
  • Fantasy Ride: The Mini Collection — Its unsourced completely.
  • Singles — Ciara is an American artist, so US certifications comes above any other market, just as US charts are present in the beginning of the table.
  • "And I" column formatting please check.
  • You don't need to link the labums again, as they are linked in the section above.
  • Why is "—" denotes a title that did not chart, or was not released in that territory not included in the other tables, and only in singles?
  • Writing and production credits — Unnecessary section. As I said before, this is a discogrpahy, not a songography that you need to list everything Ciara has done, even writing a line or two for obscure artists.
  • References — You don't need to have well known publishers in references, like The New York Times Company, Pitchfork Media, Inc, Amazon.com, Inc., RIAA, etc.
  • there is no consistency in the reference formatting. Sometimes Allmusic appear as online source, sometimes as a published source as Allmusic. Sometimes it has Rovi Corporation as its publisher, sometimes not. Thats just one example.
  • Aria.com.au is not the publisher of Australian certifications, its Australian Recording Industry Association. Aria.com.au is just their website.
  • Reference 30 and 31, both are same, then why have you added it as two different interpretations?
  • For German charts you have wrong title. Discography there is called Chartverfolgong.
  • A number of online sources are italicized, and vice-versa.

These are the things I could find at a first glance. This discography still needs tremendous work. — Legolas (talk2me) 04:51, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Ciara_discography/archive1&oldid=1051772283"