- 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 Crisco 1492 00:07, 08 May 2014 (UTC) [1]].[reply]
Lo Nuestro Award for Pop Album of the Year (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nominator(s): Javier Espinoza (talk) 07:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because it is part of a project for the Lo Nuestro Awards that were considered the "Latin Grammys", before the inception of the actual Latin Grammy Award. References for the first ceremonies are hard to find, I even sent emails to Univision and Billboard magazine to find out about the nominees on the missing years, with no success. This was a hard investigation by Erick and yours truly. I will be attentive to your comments and help to improve the article. Thanks. Javier Espinoza (talk) 07:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Why was the first FL nomination closed? --Another Believer (Talk) 19:11, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Nobody commented on it. Erick (talk) 21:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Quick Comments: There are several red links in this list. If there is no article to the list, then it should not be linked.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:25, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:55, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- What about Premio Lo Nuestro 2013 in the infobox? That should also be removed if there is no link to the awards.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 01:35, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed and updated with 2014 nominees. Javier Espinoza (talk) 16:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Where does it say that red links should not be linked? According to WP:RED, red links encourage creation of articles. Premio Lo Nuestro 2013 and Premio Lo Nuestro 2014 should be linked and created. --K.Annoyomous (talk) 08:34, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 05:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- There's inconsistent in the Year column now of what is linked: the year or the order. --K.Annoyomous (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from --K.Annoyomous (talk)
- Sorry, I still do not understand what do you mean, can you give me an example? Javier Espinoza (talk) 19:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Image alts. See WP:ALT, especially the Bush/Blair and Queen Elizabeth examples.
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 05:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Descriptions of what the award winners are wearing is not in context with the article. For example, the alt text of the Isabel Pantoja image should only be "Isabel Pantoja performing". --K.Annoyomous (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 18:41, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- América Sierra is not sorted properly.
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 05:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
--K.Annoyomous (talk) 08:34, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Surprised "Lo Nuestro Award" is not linked in the prose in the lead somewhere.
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 01:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "award" is used three times in the opening two sentences, twice in the first, a little repetitive.
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 01:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "The nominees and winners were originally selected by a voting poll " where are the nominees for 1989, 1990 and 1994? And what does "for the majority of the years awarded" mean? The info isn't available? There were no nominees?"
- We do not have the references for the nominees, I even send emails to Univision without any response. Javier Espinoza (talk) 01:33, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @The Rambling Man: The good news is that we now have the complete nominations thanks John M Baker and User:Gamaliel from the Resource Exchange for providing the article with the nominations that were other wise paywalled. Erick (talk) 00:18, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 01:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "by the audience through an online survey" surely just "through an online survey" or are only the "audience" allowed to vote?
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 01:42, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 01:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Check all non-English-language refs have a language parameter, e.g. ref 3 should have Spanish somewhere in it.
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 01:42, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man (talk) 12:46, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Lead
- "The Lo Nuestro Award for Pop Album of the Year is an honor presented annually by American network Univision." → "The Lo Nuestro Award for Pop Album of the Year is an honor presented annually by American television network Univision at the Lo Nuestro Awards."
- Fixed by Erick. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "It was first awarded in 1989 and has been given annually since." → This is repetitive using "annually" again. Suggest removing this sentence and just adding in 1989 to this sentence "The award was first presented to Desde Andalucía by Spanish singer Isabel Pantoja.".
- Fixed by Erick. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "As of 2004, the winners are selected through an online survey." → "However, since 2004, the winners are selected through an online survey."
- Fixed by Erick. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "for the most awards, winning on three occasions each" → "for the most wins, with three each"
- Fixed by Erick. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "Mexican singer Luis Miguel won consecutively for Aries (1994) and Segundo Romance (1995), with both earning also the Grammy Award for Best Latin Pop Performance." → "Mexican singer Luis Miguel won consecutively in 1994 for Aries and in 1995 for Segundo Romance; both albums also earned the Grammy Award for Best Latin Pop Performance."
- Fixed by Erick. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "In 1999, the Pop Album of the Year was shared by Mexican band Maná and Shakira with Sueños Líquidos and Dónde Están los Ladrones?, respectively, and both albums were nominated at the 41st Grammy Awards for Best Latin Rock/Alternative Performance with Maná receiving the award." → "In 1999, the Pop Album of the Year accolade was shared by Mexican band Maná and Shakira with Sueños Líquidos and Dónde Están los Ladrones?, respectively. Both albums were nominated at the 41st Grammy Awards for Best Latin Rock/Alternative Performance, with Maná receiving the award."
- Fixed by Erick. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "Supernatural by Mexican-American band Santana also won the Grammy Award for Album of the Year." → Why exactly is this mentioned in the lead? It's the only mention of the album in the lead.
- It is mentioned in the lead because the Grammy Award for Album of the Year is one of the most important music award, and Supernatural is the only "Latin" album that received the accolade along with the Lo Nuestro Award. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- How about this? In the preceding sentence "Spanish band La 5ª Estación, and Mexican groups Camila, Maná, Pandora, RBD, and Sin Bandera are the only musical ensembles to receive the accolade." You can throw in Santana throw and mention the Grammy Album of the Year accolade like saying "the latter group received the Grammy Award for Album of the Year" or something like that. Erick (talk) 21:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- That sounds good to me. — Status (talk · contribs) 23:49, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
— Status (talk · contribs) 01:08, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 00:47, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Tables
- I'm not the biggest fan of the "Winners and nominees" table. Is there any particular reason why this style was chosen? I've seen many different ways to do these sorts of tables, and I like Latin Grammy Award for Best Salsa Album the most.
- I think this table is easier to navigate. I also took several LGA list to FL status, with another template, but for this award I tried something different. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Not a problem. I'm not personally a fan of that format, but that doesn't have anything to do with the FLC criteria. It's always nice to try things differently sometimes. — Status (talk · contribs) 23:49, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Not very convinced on why the "Multiple wins/nominations" table is needed.
- Most award related lists include the wins and nominations table, that's the main reason to have it here. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
— Status (talk · contribs) 01:10, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the review. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- You're most welcome! I will give my support once the one remaining issue is amended. — Status (talk · contribs) 23:49, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 00:47, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from WikiRedactor
- Some external links that need to be corrected.
- If 2013 and 2014 don't have their own articles, I don't think that need to be redlinked in the table.
- Maybe instead of "Multiple wins/nominations", this title could be reworked as "Multiple wins and nominations"?
And that is pretty much it, since the list is already in very good shape. I trust that you will address my comments as necessary, and am happy in giving my support to the nomination! WikiRedactor (talk) 23:53, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I've addressed the above comments. Erick (talk) 22:39, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Not the table I'd use but it works, so I won't be picky about it. Everything else looks good. → Call me Hahc21 04:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! Erick (talk) 16:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments Oh, there seems to be a dead link. Other than that, everything looks all right. You guys have done an excellent job finding the sources. – DivaKnockouts 12:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your kind review, we already replaced that link. Cheers! Javier Espinoza (talk) 16:29, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment you do realise that this currently isn't listed at FLC at all? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:55, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I honestly did not know. Erick (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think it's a major problem, I'm guessing one of the FL directors or delegates "failed" it a while ago, but the bot didn't do it's business. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- What should we do about it, Mr. Rambling Man? Javier Espinoza (talk) 19:24, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd ask one of the delegates or the director. Since things appear to be going rather well, despite the six-month duration (!), it would be a shame to fail it now. Looking at the log, it was failed in February, but whoever failed it didn't add a closing note, hence the confusion. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:48, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.