Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Billboard Easy Listening number ones of 1965/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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Billboard Easy Listening number ones of 1965 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/List of Billboard Easy Listening number ones of 1965/archive1

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After a brief detour to the world of higher education, I'm back on the trail of number one songs. In 1965, Billboard changed how they compiled their easy listening chart to make it completely independent of the Hot 100 for the first time. While the pop charts were being ruled by the likes of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, the middle of the road listing was dominated by old Elvis songs...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• began compiling an Easy Listening top 40 wholly independently of the Hot 100 -- should it be wholly independent?
• That's all I could come up with on prose. Great work on this series. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, probably :-) Changed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

• File:We_Five.png appears to be using px size
• Images have alt text
• Images are appropriately licensed
• Images have succinct captions and are relevant in the article. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed the fixed pixel size :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Image review passed. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I can't find anything beyond a missing wikilink to Joel Whitburn in the 2007 source, which I've added myself. Support. Sgubaldo (talk) 17:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review: Passed

• Reliable enough for the information being cited
• Consistent date formatting
• Consistent and proper reference formatting
• No dead links
• Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
• Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for

Feedback:

• Ref 2 – add |via=[[Google Books]]
• Consider adding the {{Use mdy dates|June 2024}} template to the top of the article under the short description in case anybody else adds references later on and they are not as careful as you've been

I'm confident you'll make the change to 2, so I'll just go ahead and support. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And indeed I have :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EN-Jungwon

• Ref 10 seems to require a subscription.

That's all I could find. -- EN-Jungwon 10:39, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EN-Jungwon: - parameter added -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:46, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- EN-Jungwon 14:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:11, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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