Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Minutemen 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. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 14 days, 4 support, 0 oppose. Promote. Scorpion0422 17:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Discography of the American punk rock band Minutemen. A fairly prolific band (especially when it came to contributing to compilations), but I reckon I've covered every release Minutemen songs appear on. CloudNine 13:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Very comprehensive. Although I'm not sure why the ninth footnote is necessary, seeing as the formatting information isn't cited for any other entry. --Brandt Luke Zorn 05:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed the footnote in question. CloudNine 08:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeDecent discography all around, but there's a few major issues I've noticed:- The main problem, as I see it, is a lack of in-line citations. Alot of the content should be cited. For example, anytime the entry points out that a song is a cover, I would expect a citation for it. Also any mentions of appearances on compilations/releases without it's own article (such as all the skate video soundtracks).
- I think many of the two-column tables (Albums, Extended plays, Compilations, and Promotional releases) would benefit from a third "Comments" column. The first bullet points of many of the entries in these sections would be much better presented in another column. For example, "Features seven songs meant for a non-SST album, a number of live tracks, and a Reactionaries song." or "Live EP of a concert in March 1980 with Frank Tonche as drummer."
- I've partly addressed this. Do you think the "Comments" section of the compilation appearances should be split into two?
- Looks good to me. Drewcifer 22:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure if I understand what you mean. Drewcifer 22:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I've partly addressed this. Do you think the "Comments" section of the compilation appearances should be split into two?
- In compilation Appearances, should the first row of the Comments column go across two rows?
- Yes. Added plural to clarify this.
- The way the Video and soundtrack appearances section is formatted kind of bothers me. Mainly, the Song column seems only to give a complete tracklisting of the video, one cell at a time. I don't think that a discography is the proper place for a track listing.
- This one still seems unresolved. The major issue with the Compilation appearances and Soundtrack appearances sections is that each song is given it's own row/cell. It would be better formatted so that each compilation is given a single row, and all the songs the Minutemen contributed were listed in a single cell within that row. Doing this slightly skews the emphasis of the tables from the songs to the compilations, but that seems to follow other featured discogs with similar sections. Along the same lines, I'd recommend switching the two columns so that compilation appears first, then Song(s). Take a look at The Make-Up discography and Lightning Bolt discography for examples of what I mean. Drewcifer 22:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok. I've addressed this now.
- This one still seems unresolved. The major issue with the Compilation appearances and Soundtrack appearances sections is that each song is given it's own row/cell. It would be better formatted so that each compilation is given a single row, and all the songs the Minutemen contributed were listed in a single cell within that row. Doing this slightly skews the emphasis of the tables from the songs to the compilations, but that seems to follow other featured discogs with similar sections. Along the same lines, I'd recommend switching the two columns so that compilation appears first, then Song(s). Take a look at The Make-Up discography and Lightning Bolt discography for examples of what I mean. Drewcifer 22:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speaking of which, stop me if I'm wrong, it seems like a lot of the videos from that section are just videotapes of their performances. Are these even worth including?
- Removed the performance appearances. (I guess that addresses the above issue as well?) CloudNine 15:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- This isn't a requirement (more of a suggestion), but could you provide some External links? Drewcifer 06:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- All in progress. Thanks for the detailed review. CloudNine 11:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support (crossed out my above oppose vote). Great work! Definitely FL quality. Drewcifer 01:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Corrected any minor mistakes i found, but on the whole, good work Tommy Stardust 12:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]