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/not promoted by Crisco 1492 06:21, 8 June 2014 (UTC) [1].[reply]


Nicki Minaj videography[edit]

Nicki Minaj videography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): KaneZolanski (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I have put a lot of effort into meeting all of the FL criteria. If you oppose for any reason, let me know and I will correct them to bring the article up to the standard. KaneZolanski (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Cowlibob (talk) 16:32, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments It's clear you've put a lot of effort into this. Here are some suggestions for improvement.
  • More referencing in the lead especially for Billboard rankings and awards.
  • What does Vevo-certified mean and what makes it important? Highlight this to the reader.
  • add alt text for the main image
  • Keep same wording in each table for example in the pre-fame video section, the subtitle shows Album but the table has Mixtape instead.
  • Change each table heading so that they are uniform in order. The Year column especially changes position a lot. I would suggest Year being the first column.
  • Italicise every album title in all the tables
  • In cameo appearances, hiphopmovie.com a website directed the video? Is there no person that is named to have done the directing on their behalf?
  • In filmography section, any reason for having the television heading, documentaries etc. within the tables when they're already titled?
  • In television section, the table isn't closed.
  • Check Ref. 26, 37, 49, 62, 106 as they are dead links.

Cowlibob (talk) 11:02, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • More referencing in the lead especially for Billboard rankings and awards. DONE
  • What does Vevo-certified mean and what makes it important? Highlight this to the reader. DONE
  • add alt text for the main image DONE
  • Keep same wording in each table for example in the pre-fame video section, the subtitle shows Album but the table has Mixtape instead. DONE
  • Change each table heading so that they are uniform in order. The Year column especially changes position a lot. I would suggest Year being the first column. DONE
  • Italicise every album title in all the tables DONE
  • In cameo appearances, hiphopmovie.com a website directed the video? Is there no person that is named to have done the directing on their behalf? No, there isn't. It is just labelled as being directed by "hiphopmovie.com"
  • In filmography section, any reason for having the television heading, documentaries etc. within the tables when they're already titled? DONE
  • In television section, the table isn't closed. DONE
  • Check Ref. 26, 37, 49, 62, 106 as they are dead links. DONE
KaneZolanski (talk) 20:27, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I took the liberty of making an edit to resolve some other quick issues I had. Cowlibob (talk) 16:32, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment if you open the first link in the article, you'll see that videography means "the process of capturing moving images on electronic media". It doesn't mean "a collection of music videos". This article should thus be moved to "Nicki Minaj filmography" or "list of Nicki Minaj music videos".—indopug (talk) 10:09, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

indopug, This isn’t just a list of music videos, or a list of films. it includes music videos, film, television, cameo appearances, commericals exc. which all fall under the process of shooting a moving image. On wikipedia, most lists of music artists' music videos and details of other filmed processes they have been involved in are catergorised under “videography”. For example, Rihanna videography (which has garnered featured list status). It seems as though, on Wikipedia, people who don’t have enough of a catalogue in each, such as film, television and music videos exc. are listed under a general scope of videography as it allows for a more comprehensive article, rather than small undeveloped sub lists. But even so, Madonna has both a videography and filmography, both of which have featured list status, also. From this, it is my understanding that this is just the way such listings are catergorised on Wikipedia. Thanks for your comment. KaneZolanski (talk) 18:32, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Oppose – Quite a number of issues with this list that'll keep me from supporting from now, I'm afraid.

Resolved comments from Holiday56 (talk) 14:16, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments:
  • "Her fist solo music video" wasn't "Massive Attack" – all her mixtape videos are still videos she released as a solo artist, no?

I altered the sentence to iterate the fact that it was her first solo music video released under her major.

  • "...spawning cover versions by Selena Gomez and Taylor Swift." - how is this relevant to an article about videos by Minaj?

This has now been removed.

  • "Non Album Single" shouldn't be italicized, and shouldn't be written with the first letter of each word capitalized.

I have since made the correct changes needed.

  • What's the point of a "Denotes music videos that have not yet been released" note when all of these videos have been released?

These have now been removed.

  • Discogs is not a reliable source.

Discogs reference has been removed and replaced.

  • All of those company names shouldn't be italicised.

Italicised company names have now been reverted to standard text.

  • What are those small grey boxes which randomly appear before each subsection of the "Filmography" section?

They are now removed.

These are all just on first-glance; there's still quite an amount of comments which I didn't add regarding more minor problems which I have with this list in its current state. Sorry, but I'm gonna have to oppose for now; I think this was nominated prematurely and the article still needs some sprucing up. Holiday56 (talk) 08:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Holiday56 (talk) 14:16, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from WikiRedactor[edit]

Done

Done

I would clarify that the "Super Bass" itself is the second most-viewed music video by a solo black performer, and not that Minaj herself is the second most-viewed solo black performer.

Done

These videos were all released prior to Minaj signing to a major label and were in support of mixtapes, Would you still suggest a merger? Or maybe a retitling of the "pre-fame" section?

WikiRedactor, one uses album and the other mixtape. how would you suggest labelling that column, if a merger is the best option?

Done

Done

Done

Those in "As a personality" aren't cinematic releases, thus there is no calculation of Box-office. Would you still suggest a merger?

I am not all that familiar with the process of correctly inputting such information. Would you be able to assist or give tips? KaneZolanski (talk) 20:27, 26 May 2014 (UTC) WikiRedactor (talk) 20:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

<ref>[http://www.mtv.com/news/1644594/nicki-minaj-explains-her-violent-death-in-your-love-video/ Nicki Minaj Explains Her Violent Death In ‘Your Love’ Video - MTV<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>

This template would be considered incomplete, because it is missing information about the author, publisher, date, and access date. I would use the cite web template for these kinds of situations, and after filling in all of the necessary fields, it would look like this:

<ref>((cite web|url=http://www.mtv.com/news/1644594/nicki-minaj-explains-her-violent-death-in-your-love-video/|title=Nicki Minaj Explains Her Violent Death In 'Your Love' Video|last=Reid|firts=Shaheem|publisher=MTV News. Viacom|date=July 28, 2010|accessdate=May 26, 2014))</ref>

I see that the cite web template is used in some spots in the article, so I recommend that you go through and convert all of the other references over to this format. DONE WikiRedactor (talk) 21:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiRedactor, would I have to manually convert and fill in every single reference, or am I mis-reading? :) KaneZolanski (talk) 21:27, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that this will have to be done manually, although perhaps there is some bot that I am not aware of? WikiRedactor (talk) 21:32, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WikiRedactor, I'm not aware of bot that would help either. It seems this is going to take quite a while. thank you for your reply. KaneZolanski (talk) 21:38, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done references (finally) KaneZolanski (talk) 21:58, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from XXSNUGGUMSXX[edit]

Oppose as I see many flaws, mainly with references:

Done

One of the other editors on this page suggested I outlined this, but it has now been removed.

Done

There's my input. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 20:16, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from HĐ[edit]

Oppose Multiple ref issues: they do not go with ((Cite web)) and some of them are unreliable sources (such as "ThatGrapeJuice", is a trash source) — Simon (talk) 14:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Prosperosity[edit]

Definitely all the practically bare URLs need to be attended to first. --Prosperosity (talk) 10:11, 1 June 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.