Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Max Rebo Band

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Max Rebo Band[edit]

Self-nomination This is a list of Star Wars characters that make up the Max Rebo Band. The article includes appearances of the band in fiction and production and creation history for the band in general. What follows is a list of individual band members, their individual production/creation histories, and their role in the fiction. I'm new to Featured Lists, so any comments provided will be taken to heart and are appreciated. Thanks in advance. Dmoon1 23:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment; This is in article format. It probably belongs on Featured Article candidates. — Deckiller 00:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is what I had been debating. I'm not sure it would hold up at FAC since it is primarily a list, despite it being in mostly prose format (this is why I let it set as a Good Article for so long). The more I thought about it, it just seemed like a hybrid of an article and a list. It seems to meet the Featured List criteria, especially 1(a)3: The list contains a finite, complete and well-defined set of items that naturally fit together to form a significant topic of study, and where the set's members are not notable enough to have individual articles. But as I said in the nomination, I'm not very familiar with lists on Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Lists didn't really help me much. Dmoon1 00:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think the lists are more along the lines of combining one liners and whatnot. The article as a whole isn't a list; it's just that section that describes the characters. But then again, I'm also not familiar with the FL process. I think it has a chance at FAC with a bit more work though. — Deckiller 00:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • You may be right. I don't suppose it would hurt to see what kind of feedback it gets here, though. Dmoon1 04:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't have time to review it just yet, but it is similar to the existing FL List of Metal Gear Solid characters. Such list/articles could try their chances at either way of becoming featured. However, my personal view is that if there is a lot of prose, then it is hard to argue against the FA 1a criterion '"Well written" means that the prose is compelling, even brilliant.' being applied to a degree. Lists that have no prose other than the lead obviously can't be expected to have brilliant prose. It is difficult too for those lists that have, say, a few sentences per entry, to write prose that flows or is compelling. Most lists concentrate on just giving the facts without the padding that makes for an easy enjoyable read. Colin°Talk 09:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support If the section entitled "Band members" were extracted to Max Rebo Band Members then that would clearly be a list along the lines of List of Metal Gear Solid characters, leaving Max Rebo Band as a short article on the band. I'm really not sure what would be gained by doing that, other than making it easier for us reviewers to decide what category to put it in! The whole thing is borderline for notability so splitting it up hardly helps.
    • In the "Concept and creation" section, the last paragraph on merchandise is out of sequence chronologically, and I found that confusing. Could it be moved up to before the Special Edition.
      • I've removed this section altoghether since it appears rather trivial. Dmoon1 20:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • The text is inconsistent in the use of quotes, often (but not always) using them for facts or opinions derived from the Databank (i.e. Expanded Universe info rather than the films). The whole article would be a fraction of the size if Expanded Universe background info was not included, and most of such info isn't in quotes. Therefore I think you should restrict the quotes to
      • Quotations of something a character says.
      • Quotations of notable figures such as Lucas or Hamil.
      • Titles of things, etc.
    • For example, if Lucas had said the new tune was "less dated" then perhaps that's an opinion worth quoting. Opinions from the Lucasfilm Databank text are anonymous corporate output. Also, there's no need to say "According to the Star Wars Databank, ..." as so much of this article is "according to..." anyway.
    • Rather than repeating "was one of nine characters added ...", could you just indicate this with an icon or something?
    • It would be better to have film clips of Evar Orbus and Tik Tali Talosh.
    • The Wam "Blam" Lufba ref (41) doesn't appear to support the text, and also looks to be a fan-generated story [1] which probably doesn't count.
      • This has been corrected. Dmoon1 20:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • The refs should say which section of the databank (Movie/Expanded Universe/Behind the Scenes). Currently refs 40 and 42 look the same.
    • The text could be clearer as to which things are (1) Fictional movie information (2) Behind the scenes information and (3) Fictional Expanded Universe information. There is a kind of pattern to the entries, but sometimes I felt these aspects were a bit jumbled.
Colin°Talk 12:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll address these concerns soon, I'm somewhat busy in the real world today. Dmoon1 20:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Despite having some contribs to this article, going to have to Oppose because I don't consider it a list. Perhaps the Featured List criteria should be modified to really show what a list should be. — Deckiller 22:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • After some consideration, I think I have to agree with Deckiller regarding list criteria (how much prose can a list contain before it is no longer a list?). If passing the article off as a list involves splitting the article in two, I'm just not willing to go that far due to the notability factor. Dmoon1 00:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Perhaps after a bit more work, it can easily become a featured article. I'm game for that. — Deckiller 00:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • In the near future. I'm not exactly having a stress-free week. Dmoon1 00:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Not a list. (Mostly due to large amount of prose, and large amount of information besides the list of band members). Consider nominating for Featured Article status instead. (Should the non-list nature prove to be the consensus view, mention that if you put it up for FA). Tompw (talk) 00:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose In no way would this qualify as a "list". Put it up for GAC or FAC, but not FLC. -- Kicking222 20:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - featured lists were created to allow a form of "featured" encyclopedic content that has insufficient continuous prose to be a featured article. This is an article, not a list. Please nominate it at WP:FAC. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Max_Rebo_Band&oldid=117128061"