Since the precedent now is to have studio albums-based topics, I propose removal of all the other albums until somebody pushes the latest video one through GAN.
Nergaal (
talk) 03:24, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Something has got to change, (sic)nesses' retention period of three months has past. This is a poor hack of a solution, but would be preferable over a full removal.
Courcelles 03:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Comment Why can't it just be discography? It's still a topic. Just because Nirvana Studio Albums is a topic doesn't mean that all other discography topics must be consistent to it. That would be a bit odd…
CrowzRSA 05:00, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I'm pretty sure we have three options, 1)Reformulate it, possibly as proposed, 2)Work on and nominate (sic)nesses as a GA, 3)Delist the whole kit and caboodle.
Courcelles 05:23, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I think can get (sic)nesses to GAN within this month. It should be on hold until a the article passes the nomination…
CrowzRSA 17:58, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I can give you until month's end to get it nominated at GAN; we'll see where it goes from there.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominated.
CrowzRSA 20:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Closing as kept. I can assume good faith that the deadlinks will be handled in a timely manner.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:32, 18 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I have placed this topic up for FTRC due to failing 3a, as
List of WWE Divas Champions is not currently a Featured List. It had til the 19th and it is past it.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 20:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment This whole topic needs to be updated. The Womens and World Tag Team titles are no longer active, and this topic is about current championships. Getting the Divas champions article to FL should be easy enough as its already in good condition. I can do it sometime later this week, unless someone wants to beat me to it. --
Scorpion0422II (
Talk) 21:26, 28 December 2010 (UTC)reply
O.k, so List of WWE Divas Champions is at
FLC, that's a good start. Now, you mentioned that two of the championships are no longer active. Does that mean that they have to be removed from the topic?
GamerPro64 (
talk) 01:13, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Yes, it's been done a few times before as well. --
Scorpion0422 03:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Is this topic about current champions or overall? I ask since the current is taken out of the title; if it is, those two that are defunct will need to be removed. If it's overall, then there are many that need adding.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 02:03, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
The original definition was active championships, but the title was tweaked by various users until it omitted that vital bit. I assume that it is still the definition. --
Scorpion0422 03:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Okay; I tweaked the above to reflect, though it will mean taking off a couple of the topics.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
The defunct titles FL should be updated then.
Nergaal (
talk) 06:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I'll close this as keep sans the two articles when the FLC is promoted, which I'm actually surprised it hasn't been yet.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 17:14, 11 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I think it got promoted.
Nergaal (
talk) 18:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)reply
It offical that it got promoted. I updated the topic:
I am placing this up for GTRC as the retention period for Rewrite has expired for more than a month.
GamerPro64 17:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
I'll check with the writer of Rewrite, as on the surface it looks like it could pass GAN.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 00:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC)reply
The plot and characters sections have to be filled out, and that's basically the only thing keeping me from nominating it. It's sort of been on the backburner for a while, so that's why it's taking so long.--十八 01:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)reply
I went ahead and put it up for GAN, since while things need to be fleshed out, now's your chance to do that. I'll close this based on the outcome of that.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 22:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)reply
The GA nomination was closed as not successful. All that can be done at this time has been done at this time. On the plus side, 18 at least has this on the radar, so the chances for re-promotion are higher for this than for most.
Sven ManguardWha? 05:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)reply
I am placing this up for FTRC as
30 Rock (season 5) is not up to standards and its retention has been expired for two months.
GamerPro64 00:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC)reply
I'll close and demote this this weekend unless someone comes out of nowhere to fix it and push it to FLC, which I don't see happening.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Closed, topic delisted. Despite no further comments the result is clear.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:43, 29 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Delist – Doesn't look like Rock Steady Tour can be GA-ready in the near future. EA Artist is notified I hope. —
Legolas(talk2me) 09:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Dammit, I knew I had forgotten something! Notifyfing now.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 09:41, 20 June 2011 (UTC)reply
I am nominating this topic for GTRC for its 3.a failure as
Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast was delisted from GA status and didn't obtain the status back three months later.
GamerPro64 18:05, 27 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Delist Unless Jedit Outcast is pushed up to GA (although nothing's happened in the last month).
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 09:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)reply
This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See
Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/My World for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:
I am adding the supplementary nomination with the additions of the new GA's of the remaining album tracks, "Bigger", "First Dance", and "Down to Earth", to add these to this current good topic. Candyo32 14:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Well considering the EP was sort of a precursor to 2.0, would it be safe to just include all the articles from both? Candyo32 00:52, 7 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I don't know about that. Lady Gaga's The Fame is a good topic without The Fame Monster. And Ke$ha's Animal and Cannibal have the same separation. But the tour is for both for sure. --
ipodnano05 *
leave@message 06:17, 7 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Don't bundle the two albums into one topic; there would be no
lead article. I will support this topic if you clean up
My World Tour (it's not too bad at the moment) and get it peer reviewed (
WP:FT? #3c. The Tour will need to be GA/FA by 21 August (3 months after conclusion).
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 06:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I second his opinion for album merging. But I have to disagree and state that the tour is not is good or decent condition. It's missing a lot - A LOT. --
ipodnano05 *
leave@message 00:07, 8 March 2011 (UTC)reply
The Tour article says it supports both albums, so I'm not seeing why it wouldn't be included. Either way, it should be peer reviewed to satisfy 3c.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 21:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)reply
This needs a few more comments, I can't really close this one way or the other as is.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 02:34, 28 March 2011 (UTC)reply
If the tour article were to be PRed soon, then this topic would have until August 20 for the tour to become a GA. Without a PR, I think this additional nom will become a FTRC instead soon.
Nergaal (
talk) 01:29, 6 April 2011 (UTC)reply
I'll give the tour article another 3 days to get to PR; if it doesn't I'll move this to an FTRC.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The World Tour needs to be added in, and since it's not up to par, I'm moving this to the topic removal candidate section.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The tour hasn't concluded yet, so it would be
WP:RECENTISM, and the FT was already passed the first time before plans of a tour were even announced. Candyo32 20:40, 19 April 2011 (UTC)reply
It can't be a GA yet, but that doesn't mean it should be ignored, since it will have to be added to the topic anyway, so might as well do it now. The tour end date has continued to change (a check last week had it as June 20, but i just checked and now it's July)
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 02:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Remove Unless the tour is cleaned up and sent to PR.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 06:36, 27 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Back in December, the
Trent Reznor article was demoted from its GA status. 3 months later, there has been no act to bring it back to GA or higher.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 15:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Delist as featured topic. There are a large number of problems, not just with
Trent Reznor. In fact, I'd almost suggest that
Nine Inch Nails itself be delisted as a FA. It has a ton of dead links, some of which have been broken for almost two years. —
Torchiesttalkedits 17:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The main article had nine dead links, I was able to fix five of then with 15 minutes work. I know nothing at all about this subject, but Reznor doesn't look impossible to fix. I'll give it a go rather than see an FT fall without a fight.
Courcelles 18:15, 12 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Alright. I'll place the review on hold for the time being.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 18:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Go ahead and delist this. It's so far out of my knowledge base I don't even know what I don't know... and that's making too much work for me when I have too much on my plate. I'll try to bring it back without time pressures if I can.
Courcelles 09:22, 20 April 2011 (UTC)reply
I believe the topic should include all the 10+ singles it covers. Only about half of them are GA/FA.
Nergaal (
talk) 21:56, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist as not comprehensive. --
Admrboltz (
talk) 22:05, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep It has all of its singles on the topic. It doesn't need anymore articles added to it.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 23:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
While it may have all the specific singles, why not all of the articles that are linked to under the track listing. They all have articles, thus should be part of this GT. --
Admrboltz (
talk) 02:45, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
I looked at all of the articles and I saw that Celebration and Revolver are exclusive to the album while the rest are from preivious albums (probably why its a greatest hits album). So, this topic is all complete.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 03:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Articles can be part of multiple topics. The fact that an article is or would be in another topic does not mean that it should not be included if it is in the scope of the topic.
Nergaal (
talk) 04:30, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist A greatest hits album is about the hits! It does not make since to ignore most of the content of the topic.
Zginder 2010-12-13T02:47Z (
UTC)
I would tend to be towards keep, as GamerPro64 pointed out, not all the songs present from the album are singles from it. And why the hell weren't hte wikiprojects or the primary contributers notified of this? —
Legolas(talk2me) 05:02, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment This is poor process. At the moment there is a greatest hits GTC taking place. As this discussion involves a change in precedent, why not take the all hits/only singles discussion there. And the fact that no-one was notified is shocking.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 05:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist Despite this bad procedure, I would say that a greatest hits topic is incomplete without the hits.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 22:05, 15 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep - Ummm, not all of Madodnna's songs are singles from this greatest hits package. This nomination is absurd. It had two singles and a video. Keep Keep Keep.--
CallMeNathan •
Talk2Me 05:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Question for all those that vote keep: how does this topic pass criteria 1.d.:
There is no obvious gap (missing or stub article) in the topic. A topic must not cherry pick only the best articles to become featured together?
This topic is not titled "Singles from Celebration", so it should contain all the articles within the topic if they are notable enough to exist.
Nergaal (
talk) 05:25, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
As Tbhotch pointed out, they are not released as singles from this album, and have no point here. This nomination is fundamentally flawed. —
Legolas(talk2me) 05:32, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Leaving asides the COI, is this an
Overview topic? No. Then all the songs within its scope should be included per 1.d. The compilation sold not just because of the singles, but because of all the songs that were included. The singles reasoning sounds like saying that a TV season topic should only include the episodes that were heavily promoted, like those that were run right after the SuperBowl or around similar events, and exclude those that were not marketed in an unusual fashion.
Nergaal (
talk) 06:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist. This should not be considered a complete topic unless all of the songs on the album that are notable enough to have articles are at least GA status, not just the new songs on the album. A person reading this topic would want to learn about all of the songs on the album, not just the new ones. –Grondemar 07:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep I agree with the above statements that want this to remain a good topic--
Blackjacks101 (
talk) 22:26, 21 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist. Singles are more 'important' to an album than the other songs, but that doesn't make other songs unimportant or irrelevant. —Goodtimber (walk/talk) 16:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist - I tend to agree with the above rationale, and the same should be applied for the Britney Spears one. --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk) 21:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Close with consensus to delist. With this and the Spears one, looks like we have precedent now.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Since the precedent now is to have studio albums-based topics, I propose removal of all the other albums until somebody pushes the latest video one through GAN.
Nergaal (
talk) 03:24, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Something has got to change, (sic)nesses' retention period of three months has past. This is a poor hack of a solution, but would be preferable over a full removal.
Courcelles 03:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Comment Why can't it just be discography? It's still a topic. Just because Nirvana Studio Albums is a topic doesn't mean that all other discography topics must be consistent to it. That would be a bit odd…
CrowzRSA 05:00, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I'm pretty sure we have three options, 1)Reformulate it, possibly as proposed, 2)Work on and nominate (sic)nesses as a GA, 3)Delist the whole kit and caboodle.
Courcelles 05:23, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I think can get (sic)nesses to GAN within this month. It should be on hold until a the article passes the nomination…
CrowzRSA 17:58, 12 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I can give you until month's end to get it nominated at GAN; we'll see where it goes from there.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominated.
CrowzRSA 20:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Closing as kept. I can assume good faith that the deadlinks will be handled in a timely manner.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:32, 18 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I have placed this topic up for FTRC due to failing 3a, as
List of WWE Divas Champions is not currently a Featured List. It had til the 19th and it is past it.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 20:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment This whole topic needs to be updated. The Womens and World Tag Team titles are no longer active, and this topic is about current championships. Getting the Divas champions article to FL should be easy enough as its already in good condition. I can do it sometime later this week, unless someone wants to beat me to it. --
Scorpion0422II (
Talk) 21:26, 28 December 2010 (UTC)reply
O.k, so List of WWE Divas Champions is at
FLC, that's a good start. Now, you mentioned that two of the championships are no longer active. Does that mean that they have to be removed from the topic?
GamerPro64 (
talk) 01:13, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Yes, it's been done a few times before as well. --
Scorpion0422 03:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Is this topic about current champions or overall? I ask since the current is taken out of the title; if it is, those two that are defunct will need to be removed. If it's overall, then there are many that need adding.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 02:03, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
The original definition was active championships, but the title was tweaked by various users until it omitted that vital bit. I assume that it is still the definition. --
Scorpion0422 03:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Okay; I tweaked the above to reflect, though it will mean taking off a couple of the topics.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
The defunct titles FL should be updated then.
Nergaal (
talk) 06:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I'll close this as keep sans the two articles when the FLC is promoted, which I'm actually surprised it hasn't been yet.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 17:14, 11 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I think it got promoted.
Nergaal (
talk) 18:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)reply
It offical that it got promoted. I updated the topic:
I am placing this up for GTRC as the retention period for Rewrite has expired for more than a month.
GamerPro64 17:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
I'll check with the writer of Rewrite, as on the surface it looks like it could pass GAN.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 00:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC)reply
The plot and characters sections have to be filled out, and that's basically the only thing keeping me from nominating it. It's sort of been on the backburner for a while, so that's why it's taking so long.--十八 01:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)reply
I went ahead and put it up for GAN, since while things need to be fleshed out, now's your chance to do that. I'll close this based on the outcome of that.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 22:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)reply
The GA nomination was closed as not successful. All that can be done at this time has been done at this time. On the plus side, 18 at least has this on the radar, so the chances for re-promotion are higher for this than for most.
Sven ManguardWha? 05:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)reply
I am placing this up for FTRC as
30 Rock (season 5) is not up to standards and its retention has been expired for two months.
GamerPro64 00:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC)reply
I'll close and demote this this weekend unless someone comes out of nowhere to fix it and push it to FLC, which I don't see happening.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Closed, topic delisted. Despite no further comments the result is clear.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:43, 29 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Delist – Doesn't look like Rock Steady Tour can be GA-ready in the near future. EA Artist is notified I hope. —
Legolas(talk2me) 09:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Dammit, I knew I had forgotten something! Notifyfing now.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 09:41, 20 June 2011 (UTC)reply
I am nominating this topic for GTRC for its 3.a failure as
Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast was delisted from GA status and didn't obtain the status back three months later.
GamerPro64 18:05, 27 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Delist Unless Jedit Outcast is pushed up to GA (although nothing's happened in the last month).
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 09:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)reply
This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See
Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/My World for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:
I am adding the supplementary nomination with the additions of the new GA's of the remaining album tracks, "Bigger", "First Dance", and "Down to Earth", to add these to this current good topic. Candyo32 14:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Well considering the EP was sort of a precursor to 2.0, would it be safe to just include all the articles from both? Candyo32 00:52, 7 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I don't know about that. Lady Gaga's The Fame is a good topic without The Fame Monster. And Ke$ha's Animal and Cannibal have the same separation. But the tour is for both for sure. --
ipodnano05 *
leave@message 06:17, 7 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Don't bundle the two albums into one topic; there would be no
lead article. I will support this topic if you clean up
My World Tour (it's not too bad at the moment) and get it peer reviewed (
WP:FT? #3c. The Tour will need to be GA/FA by 21 August (3 months after conclusion).
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 06:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I second his opinion for album merging. But I have to disagree and state that the tour is not is good or decent condition. It's missing a lot - A LOT. --
ipodnano05 *
leave@message 00:07, 8 March 2011 (UTC)reply
The Tour article says it supports both albums, so I'm not seeing why it wouldn't be included. Either way, it should be peer reviewed to satisfy 3c.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 21:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)reply
This needs a few more comments, I can't really close this one way or the other as is.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 02:34, 28 March 2011 (UTC)reply
If the tour article were to be PRed soon, then this topic would have until August 20 for the tour to become a GA. Without a PR, I think this additional nom will become a FTRC instead soon.
Nergaal (
talk) 01:29, 6 April 2011 (UTC)reply
I'll give the tour article another 3 days to get to PR; if it doesn't I'll move this to an FTRC.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The World Tour needs to be added in, and since it's not up to par, I'm moving this to the topic removal candidate section.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The tour hasn't concluded yet, so it would be
WP:RECENTISM, and the FT was already passed the first time before plans of a tour were even announced. Candyo32 20:40, 19 April 2011 (UTC)reply
It can't be a GA yet, but that doesn't mean it should be ignored, since it will have to be added to the topic anyway, so might as well do it now. The tour end date has continued to change (a check last week had it as June 20, but i just checked and now it's July)
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 02:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Remove Unless the tour is cleaned up and sent to PR.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 06:36, 27 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Back in December, the
Trent Reznor article was demoted from its GA status. 3 months later, there has been no act to bring it back to GA or higher.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 15:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Delist as featured topic. There are a large number of problems, not just with
Trent Reznor. In fact, I'd almost suggest that
Nine Inch Nails itself be delisted as a FA. It has a ton of dead links, some of which have been broken for almost two years. —
Torchiesttalkedits 17:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The main article had nine dead links, I was able to fix five of then with 15 minutes work. I know nothing at all about this subject, but Reznor doesn't look impossible to fix. I'll give it a go rather than see an FT fall without a fight.
Courcelles 18:15, 12 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Alright. I'll place the review on hold for the time being.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 18:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Go ahead and delist this. It's so far out of my knowledge base I don't even know what I don't know... and that's making too much work for me when I have too much on my plate. I'll try to bring it back without time pressures if I can.
Courcelles 09:22, 20 April 2011 (UTC)reply
I believe the topic should include all the 10+ singles it covers. Only about half of them are GA/FA.
Nergaal (
talk) 21:56, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist as not comprehensive. --
Admrboltz (
talk) 22:05, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep It has all of its singles on the topic. It doesn't need anymore articles added to it.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 23:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
While it may have all the specific singles, why not all of the articles that are linked to under the track listing. They all have articles, thus should be part of this GT. --
Admrboltz (
talk) 02:45, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
I looked at all of the articles and I saw that Celebration and Revolver are exclusive to the album while the rest are from preivious albums (probably why its a greatest hits album). So, this topic is all complete.
GamerPro64 (
talk) 03:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Articles can be part of multiple topics. The fact that an article is or would be in another topic does not mean that it should not be included if it is in the scope of the topic.
Nergaal (
talk) 04:30, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist A greatest hits album is about the hits! It does not make since to ignore most of the content of the topic.
Zginder 2010-12-13T02:47Z (
UTC)
I would tend to be towards keep, as GamerPro64 pointed out, not all the songs present from the album are singles from it. And why the hell weren't hte wikiprojects or the primary contributers notified of this? —
Legolas(talk2me) 05:02, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment This is poor process. At the moment there is a greatest hits GTC taking place. As this discussion involves a change in precedent, why not take the all hits/only singles discussion there. And the fact that no-one was notified is shocking.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 05:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist Despite this bad procedure, I would say that a greatest hits topic is incomplete without the hits.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs) 22:05, 15 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep - Ummm, not all of Madodnna's songs are singles from this greatest hits package. This nomination is absurd. It had two singles and a video. Keep Keep Keep.--
CallMeNathan •
Talk2Me 05:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Question for all those that vote keep: how does this topic pass criteria 1.d.:
There is no obvious gap (missing or stub article) in the topic. A topic must not cherry pick only the best articles to become featured together?
This topic is not titled "Singles from Celebration", so it should contain all the articles within the topic if they are notable enough to exist.
Nergaal (
talk) 05:25, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
As Tbhotch pointed out, they are not released as singles from this album, and have no point here. This nomination is fundamentally flawed. —
Legolas(talk2me) 05:32, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Leaving asides the COI, is this an
Overview topic? No. Then all the songs within its scope should be included per 1.d. The compilation sold not just because of the singles, but because of all the songs that were included. The singles reasoning sounds like saying that a TV season topic should only include the episodes that were heavily promoted, like those that were run right after the SuperBowl or around similar events, and exclude those that were not marketed in an unusual fashion.
Nergaal (
talk) 06:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist. This should not be considered a complete topic unless all of the songs on the album that are notable enough to have articles are at least GA status, not just the new songs on the album. A person reading this topic would want to learn about all of the songs on the album, not just the new ones. –Grondemar 07:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep I agree with the above statements that want this to remain a good topic--
Blackjacks101 (
talk) 22:26, 21 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist. Singles are more 'important' to an album than the other songs, but that doesn't make other songs unimportant or irrelevant. —Goodtimber (walk/talk) 16:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delist - I tend to agree with the above rationale, and the same should be applied for the Britney Spears one. --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk) 21:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Close with consensus to delist. With this and the Spears one, looks like we have precedent now.
WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply