Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/December 2015

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 not promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 01:19, 28 December 2015 (UTC) [1].

---

List of reptiles of Bulgaria

Nominator(s): Gligan (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because, as with the first list in that series, list of amphibians in Bulgaria, I hope that a successful promotion would encourage other users to create or improve lists of reptiles/amphibians (and other animals) by country. As I have stated in the argumentation of the first nomination, while the lists of mammals and birds generally cover most countries, the lists of amphibians and reptiles still cover only a limited number of countries, which is surprising, having in mind the available information. I have implemented the recommendations, suggested during the nomination discussion of the List of amphibians of Bulgaria. Regards, Gligan (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

• The refs are a bit misleading. "The family contains about x species in y genera, of which z species occurs in Bulgaria.[ref]" where ref only refers to x and y but not z. pls move the ref location after the comma, and try to find some other ref for z. Nergaal (talk) 22:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Gligan (talk) 13:37, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

• dont use links in the section titles, and mention that Rhynchocephalia and Crocodilia are extant orders not represented in BG. Nergaal (talk) 23:00, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Gligan (talk) 13:37, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

• "there are no records since 193" should be there have been no. Nergaal (talk) 20:10, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
• fix redling meadow lizard to Darevskia. Nergaal (talk) 20:10, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Gligan (talk) 17:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

• I am not sure, but I think the status ntoe should be linked more than once, or placed somewhere at the top of the list. Nergaal (talk) 20:10, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

(intro should mention which of the species are threatened, since there are only like 5 of them. Nergaal (talk) 20:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

• Please fix the color contrast in the table captions. White text on light blue is hard for some people to read. Thisisnotatest (talk) 09:02, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Gligan (talk) 13:37, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

• It looks like Anguis fragilis and Anguis colchica are seperate species now and both of them live in Bulgaria. --TnoXX (talk) 15:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I have made an entry for Anguis colchica. --Gligan (talk) 17:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

• What about Trachemys scripta? Biserkov in his Определител на земноводните и влечугите в България gives information about this turtle, although it's an just introduced species.--TnoXX (talk) 13:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I added information on Trachemys scripta in the intro. --Gligan (talk) 10:18, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

• Malpolon monspessulanus doesn't occur in Bulgaria but Malpolon insignitus. Both of these snakes belong to family Lamprophiidae.--TnoXX (talk) 13:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

• The same thing is about Natrix natrix and Natrix tessellata. Reptile Data Base claims, that they belong now to family Natricidae.--TnoXX (talk) 22:05, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Review by PresN

Reviewing this list, since I reviewed the amphibian list (and I like to encourage these non-sports/music/film lists):

• A couple times in the lead, you use a spaced mdash ( — ) to make asides. This should either be a spaced ndash ( – ) or an unspaced mdash (—). Or just a colon.
• "The foundations of the Bulgarian herpetology" - "The foundations of Bulgarian herpetology"
• In all cases but Cheloniidae, you start off with "X are a family"; only for that family do you say "Cheloniidae is a family". This should be consistent, in whichever direction is correct.
• "recorded up to 1100 m altitude in Lozen Mountain" - this should either be on Lozen Mountain, in the Lozen mountains, or in the Lozen Mountain region, depending on what was meant; the capitalization/wording makes it hard to tell if the grammar is just off or if it's the proper name of a region.
• "The lower course of the rivers Struma, Arda, Maritsa, Tundzha, as well as..." - should have an "and" before Tundzha, as that's the end of the sublist. Also drop that comma, since it looks like you're not going with the oxford comma anywhere else- so it should be "The lower course of the rivers Struma, Arda, Maritsa and Tundzha, as well as..."
• "There are 73 species in 10 genera, of them two species occur in Bulgaria." - of which
• "Widespread in the whole country" -> "Widespread throughout the whole country"
• "Found in the whole country" -> "Found throughout the whole country"
• Scincidae is the only family that you don't mention how many genera there are, any reason?
• "There are 844 species in 118 genera, of them 12 species..." - of which
• "except for the high mountains of souther-western Bulgaria" - "southwestern (or southwest) Bulgaria"
• "Occurs in the Upper Thracian Plan, the Danubian Plane..." - should be "plain" both times, and I'll ignore the obvious snakes on a plane joke
• "Found in southern Bulgaria: lower Struma valley, eastern Rhodope Mountains, Dervent Heights, Strandzha" -> "Found in southern Bulgaria: lower Struma valley, eastern Rhodope Mountains, Dervent Heights and Strandzha"
• "Widespread in the whole country, up to 1600 m altitude..." - widespread throughout the whole country
• "Found in southern Bulgaria: lower Struma valley, eastern Rhodope Mountains, Dervent Heights, Strandzha, the southern Black Sea coast" -> "Found in southern Bulgaria: lower Struma valley, eastern Rhodope Mountains, Dervent Heights and Strandzha, and the southern Black Sea coast"
• "They include 329 species in 33 genera, of them..." - of which
• Vipera aspis and Vipera berus have spaced mdashes again
• The notes section should be spaced ndashes or unspaced mdashes, not spaced hyphens
• Redirects that don't seem intentional: four-lined snake is piped to its latin name which redirects to... four-lined snake
• I'd feel better about "The Reptile Database" being used as a source if there was a publisher in the ref or something that showed it was an RS, and not just some guy's pet project

That's it, most of the grammar things repeat a few times so it's not really that much. If this review was helpful, consider optionally reviewing my List of Square Enix video game franchises FLC up above. --PresN 20:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Done. The review was indeed helpful, for which I am very grateful. --Gligan (talk) 17:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Support. --PresN 01:06, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Review by Dudley

• I have set my computer to flag up harvnb errors, and it is flagging up most of your citations and sources. See Template:Harvard citation no brackets. You show a ref as <ref>{{harvnb|Biserkov|2007|p=34}}</ref>, but you should use either ref or harvnb, not both, and you have to show the author surname the same way in the source and the ref, but you have it in Latin script in the ref and Cyrillic in the source. As you are using sources in a different script harvnb does not work, so I think it would be better to show give the ref in the form <ref>Biserkov, 2007, p. 34</ref> It would then come out the same but not give an error message.

Done. --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

• "There are six turtle and tortoise species of four families" Why lump them in together? I would give separate figures for each.

Done. I have put them together, because in Bulgarian there is only one word for all turtles and tortoises :) --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

• "14 lizard species of four families" You have 14 and then four. I believe the rule is you should stick to numerals or alphabetical for numbers, not mix the two. Also I would say "species in four families", but this is probably a matter of taste.

Well, I generally spell the numbers from 1 to 10 and write the numerals for those above 10. This system was recommended to me in a process of reviewing another article (I don't remember which one). --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

• "In addition, in recent years one turtle species, the North American red-eared slider, has been registered in numerous bodies of water all over the country and is not included in the list" If this introduced species is widespread, should it not be in the list?

It is my firm belief that introduced species should not not be included in any list of species. They should be mentioned/listed separately. --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

• You have a note explaining conservation status codes as a note at the end. It would be helpful to readers to have it as a key at the start of the table.

I would be grateful if you do this yourself because I can't figure out where exactly to place the codes so that they could fit well into the list. --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:03, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

• You say in the lead that some species have not been seen since the first half of the twentieth century. I think this should also be stated in the entry for these species in the table.

It is stated in the entry of the species - Vipera aspis, Vipera ursinii. --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

But not the entries for the turtles. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:03, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

• "With the exception of two species, they are distributed in the Western Hemisphere" Do you mean only found in the Western Hemisphere?

Yes. --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

• A first rate list. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:19, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the review. I am going abroad now and will attend to these remarks upon my return next week. Regards, --Gligan (talk) 21:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

• This is, as I said, a first rate list, but I am doubtful about the criteria for inclusion. Why exclude widespread introduced species? The title of the article is "List of reptiles...", not "List of native reptiles...". Would you exclude the European rabbit from a list of mammals in Britain because it was introduced by the Romans? If not, you have to choose an arbitrary cut-off date for a species to be listed. It also seems a stretch to include species not seen since the first half of the twentieth century, particularly the turtles, only recorded once or twice, over 65 years ago, in Bulgarian waters. I do not see how they can be considered "reptiles of Bulgaria". Dudley Miles (talk) 19:03, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Support Definitely worthy for FL status. I couldn't really spot any major issues. Burklemore1 (talk) 05:19, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the support :) Best, --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment by Godot13

• Images should have Alt text.--Godot13 (talk) 04:22, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Gligan (talk) 14:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Delegate comment

Putting back on my delegate hat for a moment- @Nergaal, TnoXX, and Dudley Miles: you all gave a review (of some extent); are you willing to support/not support/finished with your review? --PresN 16:37, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

• I'm not sure if @Gligan: saw my comments about classification of reptiles. After his answer I'll be able to support/not support the list--TnoXX (talk) 19:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

• I am not sure where this list is going. @Gligan: has not replied to my last query and not edited Wikipedia at all since 14 November. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Jakec

Very nice list, I was pretty surprised to learn that there were only 38 reptile species in the whole country! Just a few comments:

• "Rhodope mountains" should be wikilinked and capitalized.
• I don't think there's any need to make tables sortable if there's only one row in them.
• Should the species names be linked instead of the common names? I'll leave this up to you, but in my opinion, it would look better.
• "Known only from a few specimen" - 'specimen' should be plural
• Altitudes should be converted to feet as well, using the {{convert}} tmemplate.
• "In addition, in recent years one turtle species, the North American red-eared slider, has been registered in numerous bodies of water all over the country and is not included in the list" - If so, why isn't it on the list?
• Why are extinct reptiles included in the list? I doubt this article lists every reptile species that has ever lived in Bulgaria, so what is the cutoff.
• "were laid in the" - should be "were laid out in the"
• "The highest diversity of reptiles is recorded in southernmost Bulgaria – the valley of the river Struma, the eastern Rhodope Mountains, the southern reaches of the river Maritsa and Strandzha." - does not appear to be cited in the lead, or repeated in the body. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 17:31, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been not 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) 00:03, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

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

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 archived by Giants2008 22:14, 6 December 2015 [2].

---

Alexandra Stan discography

Nominator(s): Cartoon network freak (talk) 17:12, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe the article is well-referenced and well-written. Nearly all the pages that link here are archived, so that the needed information can be also seen if the citation is "dead". I tried to do my best for adjusting the article's lead and citation style. Thanks in advance!

Resolved comments from SNUGGUMS

Oppose for a number of problems "The discography of Romanian recording artist Alexandra Stan consists of" is quite a mouthful, I'd recommend "Romanian singer Alexandra Stan has released"  Done I'm pretty sure what critics think of "Lollipop (Param Pam Pam)" belongs in its own article and Stan's main bio rather than here, and "bad reviews" isn't really appropriate tone  Done "hit" is too informal  Done Why is the Billboard Hot 100 mentioned in the lead when chartings in the US aren't listed in the tables?  Done "in countries like" is unnecessary, just go with "in"  Done "in August of 2014" → "in August 2014"  Done iTunes rankings shouldn't be included per WP:BADCHARTS  Done The "M" in AllMusic should be capitalized  Done Only "Billboard" in Billboard Hot 100 should be italicized  Done "abcmuzical.ro" → "abcMuzical"  Done "profm.ro" → "Pro FM"  Done "dcnews.ro" → "DC News"  Done Not sure if this is reliable "ZPAV" should link to Polish Society of the Phonographic Industry  Done "top40-charts.com" → Top40-Charts  Done "austriancharts.at" → "Austrian Charts"  Done "Finnishcharts.com" → "Finnish Charts"  Done "lescharts.com" → "French Charts"  Done "Charts.de" from the GfK Entertainment ref is unnecessary  Done "Not sure if "MAHASZ" is needed for the Association of Hungarian Record Companies, but it shouldn't be italicized either way  Done "mediapromusic.ro" → "Media Pro Music"  Done Don't italicize IFPI, which should link to International Federation of the Phonographic Industry  Done "FIMI" shouldn't have italics and isn't needed for the Federation of the Italian Music Industry refs  Done "spanishcharts.com" → "Spanish Charts"  Done "Schweizer Hitparade" only needs to be included once within a reference, and should link to Swiss Hitparade  Done "ziarulring.ro" → "Ziarul Ring"  Done The "U" should be capitalized for "urban.ro"  Done "ziaruloval.ro" → "Ziarul Oval"  Done "radio21.ro" → "Radio 21"  Done "wowbiz.ro" → "Wow Biz"  Done "kfetele.com" → "Kfetele"  Done "romanialibera.ro" → "Romania libera"  Done "libertatea.ro" → "Liber Tatea"  Done "life.hotnews.ro" → "Hot News"  Done I'm not convinced "Star Gossip Magazine" is reliable I also don't know exactly. Maybe, I can talk with another user about it. "musiq.ro" → "Musiq"  Done "tophitru.com" → "Top Hit"  Done "e-wow.ro" → "EWow"  Done Sorry, but this isn't ready to be FL at the moment. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:17, 27 October 2015 (UTC) Hello again Snuggums, I implemented all the changes you requested! Cartoon network freak (talk) 20:28, 30 October 2015 (UTC) Looking through again, there's more: You state that "Cherry Pop" and "Dance" were successful in Japan, but since I'm not really familiar with Oricon's ranking system, I don't know if this is an accurate description given how "Cherry Pop" reached 64. Is this a ranking of Top 100 like the Billboard Hot 100 and Canadian Hot 100? Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:36, 31 October 2015 (UTC) Regarding the lead's listing of rankings Turkey, Poland, and Argentina, either implement these in the chart or replace them with other nations listed. WP:WikiProject Discographies/style recommends listing up to 10 nations in the tables. There are currently 11. I'd personally use the ones she has had the most success on. While it does look better now, you haven't answered whether http://www.numberone.com.tr/tr/muzik/number-one-top-40/index.2.html is reliable (or how it is reliable). Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:36, 31 October 2015 (UTC) @SNUGGUMS: All done! In Japan, there are two singles charts: Oricon Singles Chart and Japan Hot 100. Actually, we use the Japan Hot 100, which is a related chart from the Billboard Hot 100, because there she has had more peaks on. Cartoon network freak (talk) 05:56, 31 October 2015 (UTC) I see. Anyway, please tell me whether numberone.com is reliable (provide reasons if so), and I'd also leave out "Cherry Pop" from the lead since number 64 out of 100 isn't really successful compared to "Dance", which reached the top 30, or even anything that makes the top 40. Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC) @SNUGGUMS: Removed "commercially successful". numberone.com is reliable, as it replaced the Billboard-related Turkish Singles Chart after it ceased its publication. Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:49, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Well done. Now I can support this. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:41, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: Thanks man! So, is it already a FL, or do we have to wait for a second opinion? Happy HalloweenΔ!Δ Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

FL candidates need at least three supports to pass and have to resolve all major concerns of reviewers. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Azealia911

Resolved comments from Azealia911 talk 19:27, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

* Per WP:CITELEAD, anything referenced later in the article does not need to be referenced in the lead.  Done "two studio albums and 13 singles, each accompanied by a music video." link studio album, link singles, and reword this sentence. "each accompanied by a music video" is confusing, what is accompanied by a music video, the two studio albums?  Done What exactly is the AllMusic reference telling us? Removed this. It's nothing about the music videos or singles.  Done Unlink Karaoke bar and decapitalize the K  Done "proposed her a contract" → "offered her a contract"  Done "In that year, she also released the promotional song" → "The same year, she released the promotional single"  Done "was heavily difused" What on earth does this mean?  Done "her breakthrough recording" → "the breakthrough single"  Done "In the UK, it only reached number 56." is not adhering to WP:NPOV, as you're concluding reaching 56 on the chart is a bad thing, please reword the sentance to something like "40 in many European countries,[5] while peaking at number 56 on the UK Singles Chart."  Done "The same year, Saxobeats, her debut studio album, was internationally released. The record reached the top 40 in Austria, Finland, Germany and Switzerland.[7]" → "In August 2011, Stan's debut studio album, Saxobeats was released. The album peaked within the top 40 in Austria, Finland, Germany and Switzerland." "under the new title "Cliché (Hush Hush)" to Japanese outlets." → "under the new title of Cliché (Hush Hush), exclusively in Japan."  Done Remove "which were released worldwide to promote the re-issue."  Done The actual lead section gives WP:UNDUE weight to certain aspects of Stan's career. EG, There's a large paragraph which talks about two of her earliest singles, yet her second studio album and its singles only get two sentences? Even it out.  Done Remove the spaces between table entries and references. EG, Saxobeats [19] should be Saxobeats[19], "Dance" [45] should be "Dance"[45] and so on.  Done Unlink CD and digital download after the first usage, same with Victor Entertainment.  Done "Crazy" needs citation to prove it was a promotional single.  Done Oppose: I've all the comments I can on the lead and have quickly skimmed the rest of the article, addressing all of my aforementioned comments would be a great start, but I'll most likely have comments once they're all fixed up. SNUGGUMS, I greatly respect you and your opinion on Wikipedia, but did you even read through this article? It's plagued with rookie errors. Azealia911 talk 04:02, 1 November 2015 (UTC) I did, and can say that things were definitely worse when I first reviewed it, but the article may have deteriorated since I last looked. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:29, 1 November 2015 (UTC) @Azealia911 and SNUGGUMS: All done! Cartoon network freak (talk) 05:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC) Further comments "Romanian singer Alexandra Stan has released two studio albums and 13 singles." nothing about the reissue or video album?  Done "Each song is accompanied by a music video." → "Each single has also been supported with a music video.", this also needs sourcing.  Done Remove "in late 2010 and early 2011."  Done "follow-up single "Get Back"" why is the full title of the song "Get Back (ASAP)" not used?  Done "new title of "Cliché (Hush Hush)"" → "new title of Cliché (Hush Hush)"  Done "This edition features the new singles" → "The reissue spawned three singles,"  Done Remove "It also premiered worldwide on November 24, 2014." we only need to know the initial release date.  Done There's still a lack of information concerning Stan's second album. Talk about how it charted, that it charted less successfully than Saxobeats, who featured on the album, the albums five singles, the commercial performance of those singles, ETC.  Done "In June 2015, Stan released a featuring with both Inna and Daddy Yankee on the song "We Wanna"." → "In June 2015, Stan released a single with Inna and Daddy Yankee titled "We Wanna"."  Done The headers are not correctly used, nor is the article sorted in an appropriate way, use Hilary Duff discography as an example as to how we use headers in discographies.  Done Remove all appearances of "(JPN)" in the tables, they're unnecessary.  Done None of the tables have descriptive titles, once again see Hilary Duff discography, an example would be "List of studio albums, with selected chart positions, sales, and certifications" in the Studio albums table.  Done There's still a space between "JPN: 68,245" and the reference that follows it, same with "Crazy" in the promotional singles section and ""Lollipop (Param Pam Pam)" [2]" in the music videos section.  Done The "DVD albums" section should be renamed "Video albums"  Done Are all of the songs in the "Guest appearances" section singles? Guest appearances are usually non-singles (See Lil Debbie discography) while tables of featured singles are usually titled "As featured artist" (see Azealia Banks discography)  Done Still opposing at the moment. Azealia911 talk 19:36, 1 November 2015 (UTC) @Azealia911: I've implemented all your requests. Cartoon network freak (talk) 20:24, 1 November 2015 (UTC) Further comments "two studio albums, one reissue album and video album, and 13 singles." → "two studio albums, one of which was reissued, one video album and 13 singles."  Done "Stan's second studio album Unlocked was released first in Japan in August 2014." → "Stan's second studio album, Unlocked, was released in August 2014."  Done "The record spawns the lead singles "Cherry Pop" and "Dance", which eventually gained popularity in Japan.[4][5]" How is this? Wasn't "Thanks for Leaving" released as the first single for Unlocked? Keep in mind that the lead single (there's usually only one) isn't just the most successful single.  Done Remove the "also" in ""Dance" also topped".  Done "The album was less successfully than Saxobeats" → "The album was less commercially successful than Saxobeats"  Done All release dates should be in DMY format, not MDY.  Done "List of studio albums, with selected chart positions, sales, and certifications" → "List of studio albums, with selected chart positions and sales"  Done "Columbia Records" → "Columbia"  Done Sales figures need "As of..." notes, see Azealia Banks discography as an example.  Done What's going on with the titles of the references for peak chart positions? Both the Japanese and Swiss references are titled "Extended search: Alexandra Stan (albums)" yet the reference doesn't say this anywhere. Please be sure to check every reference for an appropriate title.  Done References with only one sub-reference do not need to be split, EG the Hungary albums reference should be styled like the rest of the albums references.  Done  Not done, as this reference is not part of the Hung Medien. Currently in a rush, and will make more comments later. I'm still opposing I'm afraid, while it's looking a lot better there are still basic errors present. In future, please ensure before submitting something for featured article/list review, that it is more than ready to be recognized as such. Most of the work on this article has been advised by the reviewing editors, and while it would be silly to keep opposing this on the basis of 'it wasn't ready at the start of this FLC!!!' (I will eventually support I'm sure), it was perhaps a poor call of judgement to submit this list for FL so soon. Azealia911 talk 09:33, 2 November 2015 (UTC) @Azealia911: Thankyou, done. Cartoon network freak (talk) 20:08, 2 November 2015 (UTC) Further comments "The record spawns singles" → "The record spawned singles"  Done "which eventually gained" → "which gained"  Done The lead singles table lists 'Title → Year', while the featured, promotional and music video tables are all 'Year → Title', convert all tables to 'Title → Year'.  Done Use scope="row" in the music video table.  Done References don't need to be continually repeated in the 'Music videos' box if they're the same. EG, you can remove all of the references in the directors collumn, with the exception of "Vanilla Chocolat"  Done {{N/A|Unknown}} → {{Unknown}}  Done Does Stan provide vocals to "TBC" or does she just appear in the video? If she just makes a cameo, remove the listing.  Done {{Reflist|2}} → {{Reflist|30em}}  Done Whoops, corrected now. Azealia911 talk 13:36, 3 November 2015 (UTC) also  Done No 'External links' section?  Done Getting there. Azealia911 talk 09:29, 3 November 2015 (UTC) @Azealia911: Adjusted, as you requested! Cartoon network freak (talk) 12:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment by Godot13

• I think the lead image needs Alt text--Godot13 (talk) 04:35, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

@Godot13: Done! Cartoon network freak (talk) 12:57, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

• How many albums is the lower limit accepted at wp:music for a stand-alone discography list? Nergaal (talk) 20:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, 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) 18:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

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