Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Lecrae 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 promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Lecrae discography[edit]

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

Toolbox
Nominator(s): 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that it satisfies the criteria for featured lists. For a long time it had issues with citations and referencing, I believe that these issues have long been addressed. The article has already undergone peer review and the recommendations implemented.3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
;Drive-by comment
  • In the studio albums table, the titles are left-aligned, but in all the other tables they are centre-aligned. I believe the standard for discographies is to left-align that column
  • Back for more later :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:05, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think I just had difficult figuring out how to do that for the other listings.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:35, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comments on the lead
  • First sentence says 9 studio albums but the infobox says 8
  • "Lecrae began garnering mainstream attention when he performed at the 2011 BET Hip Hop Awards Cypher" - is the word Cypher meant to be on the end there? What does it mean?
  • Two consecutive sentences start with "Gracity", maybe change the second to "the album"?
  • That's it for the lead. I will take a look at the tables later -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:30, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox says 8 because the 9th is listed as a collaborative album - I forget why that was done (or even if it was me or someone else).
Cypher is part of the title, I'm happy to elaborate.
The awards are called "BET Hip Hop Awards Cypher"? Sounds a bit odd but a bit of Googling suggests it's correct, so fair enough.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Gravity" sentences fixed.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:02, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Initial comments on the tables
  • Studio albums - US Internet column is unsourced
  • EPs - "Church Clothes" appears both here and in the mixtapes table - are both the same release? If so, why does it only have chart placings in the EP table?
  • More later :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Source added for Internet Albums. Church Clothes was released as both a mixtape and as an EP. The mixtape was longer and released for free, the EP was much shorter and released commercially. So they technically are different releases, they just share the same Wikipedia article because the EP doesn't have enough separate coverage for its own article.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that makes sense. An old fool like me can't keep up with all the new-fangled formats for music in the digital age :-D -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:23, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the singles as a lead artist table, the first two rows have the album title cell shaded and differently aligned. I think something is up with the scope on those rows.
  • Some of the refs for singles/songs are against the release date or the album title rather than the title - better to be consistent in their placement
  • A few of the music videos have no source
  • Think that's it on the tables...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    All of this should be fixed now--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • You may want to consider using semi-colons in the first sentence (e.g., "eighty singles, including forty-one as a featured performer, forty-five music videos..." → "eighty singles, including forty-one as a featured performer; forty-five music videos..."
  • No. 1 → number-one
  • No. 3 → number-three (or "in the top five")
  • "It received RIAA Gold certification" → "It was certified Gold by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)"
Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Body
  • "—" denotes a recording that did not chart or was not released in that territory. Beginning in 2015, Billboard rendered most hip hop/rap albums ineligible for the Gospel charts → this note is usually indicated at the bottom of the table (see here for an example).
    This was separated from the tables by Izno and myself due to concerns about accessibility.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chart column titles' font size is reduced to 90%; those with more than one word take up two lines with <br> as well.
I'm not sure what you're requesting here.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't list notes at the bottom of the table, use {{efn}} and create a "Notes" section at the bottom of the article followed by {{notelist}}.
This was done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • You may want to consider adding more archive links to the sources as many are older web links, and perhaps to Billboard links as well because they have changed their chart URLs many times in recent years.
I did a bit of this today, I'll go through and check to make sure that they all are live.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Non-album single → {{n/a|non-album single}}; rowspan="x" {{n/a|non-album singles}}
  • "Get Back Right" (with/featuring x) → "Get Back Right"<br>(with/featuring x) (applies to all)
    Use of small text in for this is a violation of the Manual of Style guidelines for accessibility, much more clearly than the notes at the bottom of tables is.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    From what I've read at MOS:SMALLTEXT, small font is prohibited in "infoboxes, navboxes, and reference sections." I'm pretty sure this isn't a violation (tables don't automatically reduce font size), otherwise small text would be banned from every article, and that certainly isn't the case. You should be okay here. Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Why do these need small text, though? I might pose a query on the talk page for MOS:ACCESS.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, there is and should be a high bar for the use of abnormally-sized text. The line in question you are reading is there because adding small text to elements in the listed kinds of templates/sections takes us below the absolute threshold for small size text, not because it shouldn't say more strongly that small text elsewhere does not also need to have strong justification. --Izno (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, Izno, for your feedback here and elsewhere.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would strongly suggest removing the day and month from the date column in the singles tables... it is difficult to source and not the standard format. (You can still show release order by listing them chronologically)
    I looked at the guidelines, and there's nothing that says you shouldn't do this, just that it's not necessary. In this case, all the exact dates are supported by the citations, or else just the year is given.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not 100% on the citations for the dates at this point. For example, ref 73 links to an article that was posted on May 5, 2008, but the release day in the table is listed as March 4, 2008. Also, the article just gave news about a music video being filmed, which proves nothing about the release of the single. You can choose to keep the days and months, but I'm not too sure if another reviewer would approve. Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, I might just stick to year, then.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • use "rowspan=x" for the album names; you don't have to repeat them each row.
    Not using rowspan was another thing implemented in the changes by User:Izno and myself to comply with MOS:ACCESS, because some screen-readers have difficulty with the rowspan.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That's tough. Do you know of a discussion about this somewhere? (Perhaps this may affect many articles). The "good example" tables in MOS:DTT happen to use rowspan. Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, so it looks like using rowspan for year is okay. It might just be an issue with the right-most column. This edit and the talk page discussion set the precedent, the issue was brought up at the discography Wikiproject but no discussion resulted--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]
    There are multiple factors here. One: The header/first cell for each row should be the main topic of the row (which is the song I think for most of these tables). This is because screen readers read left to right (normal humans do as well). Two: In data tables, any row/colspan that isn't in the headers typically causes difficulty for screen readers as well, so those as well are/should be removed.

    Yes, these issues affect many other articles. Editors who know about accessibility will sometimes clean them up, but more often we try to act as force multipliers by educating about these topics because there's just so much wiki to cover. --Izno (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • There is no "sales" column in the tables; you can remove "sales" from the table captions.
This was done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Charts are listed in artist's original country followed by alphabetical order of chart name (e.g. "US Gospel" follows "US Christian" (Sorry, but you will have to rearrange most of the columns in the tables).
Done. It's actually an easy fix using Visual Editor (one of the few cases where Visual Editor is better than wiki-text for table editing).--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, list the Bubbling Under column first.
  • The standard maximum amount of columns for a discography table is ten—you'll have to remove some in the tables that list more than ten.
    Yep, I thought this was getting unwieldy. There's a complication that I'll mention below.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Use the real chart name: R&B → R&B/HH
Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subcharts are not be listed when a song has charted on the main chart:
    • For example, if even just one of Lecrae's songs has charted on Hot Christian Songs (which has occurred), do not add a column for Christian Digital Charts. For songs that did not chart on the main Hot Christian Songs Chart, add a — in the Hot Christian Songs slot with an {{efn}} next to it listing the Christian Digital peak, or given that Christian Airplay is also a subchart, pick between either (usually the highest peak).
      Okay, so for this and the need to reduce to 10 columns max: Yeah, I see why this is. Where I'm not sure what to do is that there are songs that have only charted on a subchart. What do I do in those cases? Especially in the case of "other charted songs"? I'm thinking maybe change the entire layout and use Template:Single chart?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      The Template:Single chart is used in the "Charts" section of a song or album article; I haven't seen it used in a discography. You can still use the same format for the other songs charted table. If the songs have only charted in a subchart, then you still label the column with the main chart but add footnotes with its peak on the subchart. Would you like me to code a small example on here of how this could look? Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      I understand what you mean, there's already an example of this in the studio album section with Let the Trap Say Amen. The problem I'm seeing is that there are songs like "Dum Dum" that only charted on a sub-chart, without charting on a main chart. Do I just list them as a row of blanks for the maincharts but with the footnotes for subchart peaks?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      That's what I've seen in other articles. Heartfox (talk) 20:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • This also applies to the Gospel Digital column (replace peaks with —{{efn}} in Gospel Songs slots), and others.
      • Good work so far, but there is a fair bit to do... I'd advise you look over WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS for what columns are permitted when for the singles, and take a look at WP:DISCOGSTYLE (while it's a dormant proposal most of these guidelines are followed by most articles). This is my first time reviewing anything so I don't know exactly what I'm doing lol but I do have some experience with discography articles and I didn't want to let this sit in the review pile. Good luck! Heartfox (talk) 21:43, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        Thank you, what I haven't commented on are what I'll work on implementing tomorrow.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        I haven't gone through this, but you may want to check the Christian radio release archives here, and others in case you find Lecrae and then can use it as a better source. Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        Ooh, thank you for that link, that will be helpful in general.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question, Heartfox: Top Rap Albums is now a subset of R&B/Hip-Hop, but the creation of the Top R&B chart as a subchart came about after Lecrae was charting on the Top Rap Albums. I can note the split, but is there justification for keeping the Rap Albums charts since he was on those for years before the change was introduced?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:06, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to ask the Discography Wikiproject. Heartfox (talk) 20:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I raised the question on Wikipedia talk:Record charts.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • 3family6, the charts used look appropriate.
  • You don't have to provide a footnote for the position on the subchart if it's already charted on the main chart (they're pretty much redundant).
  • If you choose to link each instance of Billboard or other publications, make sure all of them have wikilinks (e.g., ref 32 and 80 don't, but others do).
  • In the albums table, the other US charts should follow US, not BEL and CAN (same for mixtapes table).
  • As you've chosen not to use abbreviations for the chart titles in other tables, BEL and CAN should be spelled out.
  • Specify which Belgian chart region you're using (Flanders or Wallonia).
  • Use <br /> in the chart titles for the tables so it's not all on one line with a big column (right now some do and some don't).
  • You don't need references for the songs in the other charted songs table as they're already listed in the Billboard references.
I've removed all citations from songs for which there are chart positions cited.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • You may want to limit the length of the song title column in the featured songs table, the final entry is pretty long. I think you could <br /> it. Heartfox (talk) 22:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It's when I see things like deliberately ignoring guidelines such as MOS:NUMERO as was done above that I recognize that be promoted to Good Article status does not mean that the article is compliant to any specific guideline. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for bringing that to my attention, I apologize. I took the initiative to actually respond to this editor and tried to focus on more relevant things like WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS and WP:DISCOGSTYLE and hadn't done a thorough review of the entire MOS. Heartfox (talk) 20:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Per this discussion, I've merged the R&B/Hip-Hop chart listings and Rap chart listings together, and put Rap charts in the footnotes. Heartfox, anything else that I need to do?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Support from TRM[edit]

(WikiCup entry)

  • Don't use EP without explaining it first.
    Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "reached No. 1 on " why do we have that in the prose, why isn't it "number one"? Or vary it with "topped the chart" or similar.
    I'm not sure what the issue is here, "No. 1" is consistent with MOS:NUMERO.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Christian hip hop site" do you mean website?
    Yes. Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • " 53rd Grammy Awards" vs " 2013 Grammy Awards" and both redirect! Be consistent with how you refer to the ceremonies.
    Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As of September 2014, he has sold over" nearly six years ago, and he's had gold/platinum albums since, no chance of an update?
    Updated. It's over 3 million now.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • " certified Gold by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)" i would split the links, so link "certified" to the certification article, and RIAA to the RIAA article.
    Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Gospel charts[15]" missing a full stop.
    Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some of the charts need to be explained if they're not linked, e.g. I thought NET meant Netherlands, but it turns out to mean Internet.
    There doesn't seem to be any articulated standard here for the abbreviations, so I'll see what I can do to be more clear. If anything is still unclear, please let me know specifically which ones.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where is "Don't Waste Your Life" referenced?
  • I'm actually not sure now whether or not this was ever described as a single. The only internet references I can find to it call it a "song". I've moved it into the "other charted songs" section.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where is note D referenced?
  • Where is note F referenced?
  • Where are "High" and note G referenced?
  • Same for notes H and I.
  • In fact, all notes which make claims of chart positions must be referenced.
    This conflicts with the feedback from Heartfox above, who thought that the footnotes and chart listings were overcited. The first instance of each chart-listing mention has a citation. So they all are referenced, not all have an immediate citation. "High" now has a cited reference.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are 104 spaced hyphens, these should be en-dashes, per MOS.
I'll get to work on this.
Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:53, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave this here for now, I'll come back once we've dealt with these issues. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the long delay, The Rambling Man, my wife was visiting and I've been having trouble with my laptop. Please see my above comments and the accompanying edits.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support now all my issues have been addressed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments from ChrisTheDude[edit]

Completely forgot about this one, humblest apologies. A handful of further/final comments from me.....

  • I agree with TRM above that the chart column headings need clarifying. I can't see anything, for example, to explain what "CLASS DIG" means.
    I've tried to clarify things, please let me know if there's anything still to fix--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also agree that notes such as "Charted at No. 2 on the Gospel Digital Songs chart" need sourcing
    Please see above. These are referenced, with a citation for the first occurrence. I removed the repeated citations due to Heartfox's above concerns about the citations being redundant.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • A couple of the videos have no director listed, is this information not known? If so, put something to that effect.
    Some of the videos do not provide the director(s), and I've been unable to find the information online. Whether this truly is unanswerable, I don't know.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:07, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your feedback, ChrisTheDude, apologies for the delay in my response.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my computer was being repaired and so I missed that this review had been revived. I'll get to these tonight.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:18, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - Pass[edit]

Sooooooooo many sources... I will get to this tomorrow. Aza24 (talk) 08:41, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These all should be fixed, please let me know if I missed anything. Thanks.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:12, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You missed a little but I went ahead and fixed it. Great work here, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 19:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks like everything has already been addressed. ~ HAL333 01:33, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: you opposed earlier. Are you satisfied with the responses, or did you have more issues to point out? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Not the nominator but I've added a ref to support the music video. Cowlibob (talk) 11:26, 2 October 2020 (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://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Lecrae_discography/archive1&oldid=983057130"