Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Mac DeMarco discography/archive2

• Any reason why the mini-LP isn't noted in the lead?
  • Because it hasn't been released yet and the sentence it would be included in says "Mac DeMarco, a singer-songwriter from Canada, has released". I was going to add it once it's released but I could change the sentence and add the mini-LP if you think I should. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "his debut extended play" you've already abbreviated extended play so use EP instead. This happens more than once in the lead.
  • Fixed. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "The EP sold out its 500-unit run. " is this explicitly referenced somewhere?
  • "and soon all 500 copies of the self-released EP were sold out." In the reference following the next sentence. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "from contemporary music critics." don't think the link to music journalism is either appropriate or necessary.
  • Removed. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "acclaim and peaked at number 26 on the Billboard Heatseekers chart and was" and and .... one too many run-ons for me.
  • Fixed. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "met with critical acclaim" repetitive.
  • Fixed. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Don't link United Kingdom, at the very least link the appropriate charts article.
  • Done. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Which country is each release date pertinent to?
  • Wherever it was first released. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • State each location explicitly. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Done. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:32, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "November 8, 2013[15][16]" why two refs for a single date? This happens more than once.
  • For several release formats. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• mini-LP release is not referenced.
  • • But the refs are next to the date. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've moved the extra references next to the release formats. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:32, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Rock and Roll Night Club release is not referenced.
  • I was told previously that releases that have their own articles don't need references, but I've added them now. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Check reference titles for WP:DASH violations, i.e. don't use spaced hyphens, use spaced en-dashes.
  • Done. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Avoid SHOUTING in reference titles.
  • Done. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Another One is referred to in its link as an EP, which redirects to album which states it's a mini-LP. Bit messy.
  • I've changed it to the album link now, but do you think the article should be renamed to Another One (mini-LP)? Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for now. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments! Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: I've addressed all of your comments. Littlecarmen (talk) 17:36, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• File:Mac Demarco @ The Middle East Downstairs (13720056215).jpg: Needs a personality rights template at the Commons.
  • Added. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Mixture of links and no-links for works and websites in the "references" section
  • They're linked the first time they're used. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Reference 34, 35, and 36 shouldn't link to YouTube unless they're licensed videos; see WP:COPYLINK and Intellectual Reserve, Inc. v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Inc.
  • They're all licensed. Ref #34 and 35 are on the directors' channels and 36 is on the label's channel. This doesn't violate WP:COPYLINK. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • How do you know that? Have you contacted the YouTube channels to confirm licenses? None are verified profiles; how do you know those are the actual directors? Seattle (talk) 17:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • All right, I've removed the links to YouTube and exchanged them. Littlecarmen (talk) 18:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• DeMarco was in several bands in high school and, after graduating in 2008, released his debut EP, Heat Wave, under the name Makeout Videotape, in 2009. sentence poorly constructed
  • Changed. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Heat Wave was followed by two EPs, Eating Like a Kid and Bossa Yeye, and one studio album, Ying Yang; all in 2010. incorrect use of semi-colon
  • Fixed. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• In 2011, DeMarco went back to recording as a solo artist, which resulted I'm not sure his decision to work independently caused Captured Tracks to release the EP. Is this accurate?
  • Changed. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• peaked at number 90 in the United Kingdom, on which chart?
  • Added. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• 2 was met with critical acclaim and peaked at number 26 on the Billboard Heatseekers chart do you have references for "critical acclaim"?
  • Yes, the Metacritic page for 2. It says "universal acclaim". Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "EPs" in infobox doesn't link anywhere
• "mini-LPs" section doesn't link anywhere either. Seattle (talk) 05:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just used Template:Infobox artist discography. Is EPs supposed to link somewhere? I added a link for mini-LPs, but it won't show up. Maybe there's a problem with the template because I also don't see any links in the examples used on the template page. Thank you for your comments! Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • They're supposed to link to the appropriate section in the text, in this case "Extended plays" and "mini-LPs". Seattle (talk) 17:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh okay, I've fixed it now. Littlecarmen (talk) 18:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I can't help but think that these tables would benefit from being restructured to make them sortable. The "Album details" column looks as though it should be split into three different columns, "Release date", "Label" and "Formats", rather than providing these as bullet points in a cell, which to be honest, defeats the purpose of putting them in a table in the first place.
• The lists of singles and music videos can be made sortable pretty simply in their current layout. Harrias ^talk 20:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've never seen that done on discographies on Wikipedia. I've made the music video table sortable so people can sort the videos by director but it doesn't make sense to me to make the others sortable as well. Littlecarmen (talk) 02:52, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've never seen it done on discographies on Wikipedia either, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be. Being able to sort by name, by date, by chart position seems to me as though it would make the tables more useful. (With these tables being so short, I appreciate it isn't going to be as useful in this as in others, but I would still judge it an improvement.) Harrias ^talk 06:43, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've made the tables sortable now, I just kept peak chart positions and formats unsortable since only one of his three studio albums has charted so it doesn't make sense to sort by chart position right now and formats are listed so sorting doesn't really help the reader see which formats an album was released in. Littlecarmen (talk) 18:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Thanks, I think that's an improvement. I added a template to sort the directors correctly by surname, but otherwise all good. Only further question I have is whether it is worth mentioning the upcoming mini-LP Another One in the lead at all? Harrias ^talk 15:46, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for your improvements! I think so, I added a sentence about it to the lead. Littlecarmen (talk) 16:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Now I'm just being picky, but I think a link to a "news" article would be better. This article has a bit at the bottom maybe? Harrias ^talk 16:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • No problem, I exchanged the source. Littlecarmen (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• "Mac DeMarco, a singer-songwriter from Canada, has released" - I would reword this as "Canadian singer-songwriter Mac DeMarco has..."
  • Done. Littlecarmen (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "DeMarco is set to release a mini-LP titled Another One in the summer of 2015." - This is an event which hasn't happened yet, so what's this doing in the lead?
  • Harrias requested it in the resolved comments box above. Now I'm unsure. Littlecarmen (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• No sales amount for studio albums?
  • I've never seen sales numbers for any of his releases. Littlecarmen (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Section 1.3: "mini-LPs" => "Mini-LPs".
  • Fixed. Littlecarmen (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Billboard needs to be linked in ref. 5, not 12.
  • Fixed. Littlecarmen (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Can you make all the links white ("working") here?
  • Done. Littlecarmen (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For this to pass, you need to invite one more editor. Also, I would like you to look at my nomination. -- FrankBoy _CHITCHAT 22:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at it now! Thank you for your comments :) Littlecarmen (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• General comments
  • All violations of MOS:DASH need to be fixed.
    • I think I've fixed them all. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • All instances of {{N/A}} need to be filled in with an explanation as to what they mean, EG {{N/A|Non-album single}} for Young Blood, and the same for whatever the two directors have N/A's for.
    • Done. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Lead comments
  • "2 was met with critical acclaim" Needs source.
    • It had a source later on but I've moved it. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "DeMarco was in several bands in high school until he graduated in 2008." Needs source.
    • Same as above. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Heat Wave was followed by two EPs, Eating Like a Kid and Bossa Yeye, and one studio album, Ying Yang, all in 2010." Needs source.
    • That's all sourced in the body of the article. WP:LEADCITE says not to add references to information that is sourced in the body. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 2011, DeMarco went back to recording as a solo artist and was signed by Captured Tracks." Needs source.
    • Added. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They released his EP Rock and Roll Night Club in early 2012" Needs source.
  • "peaked at number 26 on the Billboard Heatseekers chart." Needs source.
    • Both sourced in the article body. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Body comments
  • The lead mentions how the album 2 charted at number 26 on the Billboard Heatseekers chart, but it's not displayed in the charts table.
    • Added. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd remove all mentions of "(as Makeout Videotape)" and replace them with a symbol, explained in a footnote at the bottom of the page.
    • Done. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In regards to the album tables, I really detest the current layout entirely in the body, sorry to say. I'm not sure if it's policy to follow a certain stylistic layout, and if it isn't then feel free to keep it as is, but I'd really suggest changing the format to something similar to that of the majority of other featured discographies, like Lady Gaga discography or Lily Allen discography (With one column for Album details, listing release date, label and format). I don't see the point in having three separate columns for album details when they can all be shoved into one small box.)
    • Just seen after writing this that another user suggested changing it, it looked perfect before. Harrias, why did you suggest such a radical, messy layout change that virtually no other discog article uses? Let alone a featured-grade one?
      • So should I change it back or should we ask the delegates? Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, if there's no definitive policy that states all discographies should have concurrent layouts, then I guess it's up to you, or delegates as you suggest. But I see no pros to the new format change, especially if information is released giving means for a "Sales" column to be added in the studio albums table, squishing everything even smaller still. The sortable options also make no sense to me, dates are already sorted in regular tables from earliest to latest release, I see no reason why people would want to sort labels, especially in this case as there's two of the same label and one N/A, I can maybe just see reason for title sort option, but even so, there's three albums, it's not like we're dealing with tons of information. But hey, even though there may not be a policy, I think some common sense needs to be applied to our thinking, and having a concurrent layout theme from discog to dicgoc, in order as to not confuse readers, seems more than logical. Azealia911 _talk 15:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested the change because I felt it would be an improvement, and in my opinion, it is. While I grant that the appearance may be slightly compromised, the ability to sort adds increased functionality. Yes, this is a relatively short list, and therefore the benefits might be relatively small. The question of why to do this on a "featured-grade one" seems odd: the point of the "Featured" process is to refine articles, lists and images, and to improve them. Otherwise this page would be nothing more than a list of people saying "Support" or "Oppose". Maybe requesting such a change was radical, maybe it was beyond the purview of a single FLC and should be a wider discog MOS discussion. But at the end of the day, I made a suggestion that I thought would improve the list. Harrias ^talk 16:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the formatting of the discography back now. Littlecarmen (talk) 16:07, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) I respectfully disagree per my comments above. I feel the confusion and unnecessary messiness (for lack of a better word) that it adds, outweighs the slight benefit it brings to the page. I'd probably agree with you had the discography been long and hard to navigate otherwise, but I don't feel it's necessary in tables of 3-5 albums per listing. Littlecarmen I'll leave it up to you or delegates to decide which, and Harrias, I'll be more than happy to partake in a discussion on the MOS of discographies with you. Azealia911 _talk 16:13, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• • Even though they have independent articles, all three albums need refs to back up their release dates.
    • Added. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd remove all sortable options from the tables, they're rarely used in discography articles.
  • I see no issue in using rowspans for singles, maybe music videos as they cross into filmography teritory, but certainly seems ok to use them for singles.
    • These two have to do with the format change of the discography requested by Harrias so I'm going to wait before I change them. Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May have some more comments later, that was a brief scan of the article, so some things may not need fixing, feel free to tell me something's already done/sourced/correct. Azealia911 _talk 20:59, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for you comments! Littlecarmen (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, thankyou for addressing the majority so quickly, I appreciate it! Azealia911 _talk 15:34, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all! Littlecarmen (talk) 16:07, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• One tiny final comment, there's various refs for "digital download" in album details boxes. It's pretty much a given that projects released in the 2010's are released for digital distribution. If anything, I'd source the far less common cassette release, but that's purely optional.
  • All formats are sourced! The formats are usually mentioned in the references used for the release dates and I only added a separate sources for formats that aren't mentioned in the source for the release date. Littlecarmen (talk) 16:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]