This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Whether commas should be eliminated altogether or[Entries in field] should be separated by using commas, {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}}.[1] [1] For short horizontal lists of two or three items, comma separators are acceptable, but for longer lists the use of {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}} is preferred as they offer a benefit to users of screen readers. Vertical lists should always be implemented by {{ plainlist}} or {{ ubl}} and never by
<br />
tags for reasons of accessibility.
class =
be added is not part of this proposal and needs to be discussed separately. —
Ojorojo (
talk) 14:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Several music infobox templates have the same parameters, but different explanations/guidelines. For example, "Genre":
These should be harmonized, along with other common parameters including "Label", "Producer", "Format", and "Writer". (Infoboxes single and song specify {{ Plainlist}} for "Recorded", probably because they don't have separate date and "Venue" and "Studio" parameters; these can be changed when added). The standard parameter guideline with explanatory footnote used in Infobox musical artist should cover all:
[Entries in field] should be separated by using commas, {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}}.[1] [1] For short horizontal lists of two or three items, comma separators are acceptable, but for longer lists the use of {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}} is preferred as they offer a benefit to users of screen readers. Vertical lists should always be implemented by {{ plainlist}} or {{ ubl}} and never by
<br />
tags for reasons of accessibility.
Are there any objections to adding this? — Ojorojo ( talk) 15:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Producer =
allows for the optional use of {{
flatlist}}, right? This was added over three years ago
[1] and is consistent with
MOS:HLIST. This option is used in many album GAs, including for Genre =
and Label =
; adding it here and harmonizing with other infobox guidelines just adopts accepted practice. One's personal preference does not make it "correct". —
Ojorojo (
talk) 14:16, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
{{
flatlist}}
{{
plainlist}}
{{
hlist}}
etc. is largely presentational, the important thing is that lists should be semantically marked up as such. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 14:56, 2 August 2016 (UTC)For two or three [field entries], use commas for separation. For four or more, use {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}}.[1] [1] For short horizontal lists of two or three items, comma separators are acceptable, but for longer lists the use of {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}} is preferred as they offer a benefit to users of screen readers. Vertical lists should always be implemented by {{ plainlist}} or {{ ubl}} and never by
<br />
tags for reasons of accessibility.
Should middots also be used in place of commas that are in Americanized recording dates ([month] [day] [comma] [year])? Think of cases where punctuation and prepositions would benefit the layout in infobox parameters like "Recorded" and "Studio". September 1, 2, and 5, 1971; October 5, 1973, for example. Dan56 ( talk) 20:16, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
I would like clarification on the format of this field, and for it to be included in the MOS for this template. Since 2008, albeit before the separate Recorded field was introduced, I have used this format:
1 January – 8 April 2014 at [Studio name] in New York City
However, recently I've been seeing something like this in the Studio field:
... or even <small> text being used for the studio. What's the deal there, and all the commas? To me it looks very awkward if the [Studio], [City], [State] format is used, rather than [Studio] in [City], [State]. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 00:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
or
You do realize that Studio =
is its own parameter now, right? For live recordings, it's Venue =
. The only thing that should be in the Recorded =
parameter, is the recording dates. Also for the record, there's no guidance around adding the provenance of the studio or venue, so it's fair to add it. Linking should be within the
WP:OVERLINK guideline. In other words, if the city is well-known, such as Los Angeles, New York, London, Paris, Berlin, etc., don't even link the city name. Linking the province or state is probably not required per that guideline. If the country is listed, don't link it at all. If three or more entries are to be used, use a list template. Based on the example, I would use
Abbey Road Studios, London
(backlinks broken for example here) and not "in London".
And for the record, if the editors at infobox song want to get with the programme, they could add the parameters, and harmonize their list requirements with this template all at the same time. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 03:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
{{small|}}
text for any infobox parameters.
Mac Dreamstate (
talk) 17:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Back to the original question, is it "Abbey Road Studios, London" or "Abbey Road Studios in London"? I count five editors in favor of commas (Walter Gorlitz, Piriczki, Ilovetopaint, JG66, Ojorojo) and two opposed (MacDreamstate, Dan56). Is there consensus or not? Piriczki ( talk) 19:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
@ JG66:, if you cant see how there would be cases where prepositions would be more useful than strictly punctuation, then you clearly lack imagination. Dan56 ( talk) 20:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
@ Nyuszika7h:, @ Piriczki:, @ Walter Görlitz:, @ Ojorojo:, should prepositions also be avoided when listing several recording dates? Think of cases where punctuation and prepositions would benefit the layout in infobox parameters like "Recorded": September 1, 2, and 5, 1971 at Electric Lady Studios in New York; October 5, 1973, and January 1, 1974, at the Record Plant in Los Angeles (for example). This isn't uncommon, and it's ridiculous to limit editors to punctuation. Consider Big Fun (Miles Davis album): "Columbia Studios B and E, New York" (emphasis added). Should "and" be removed and the line be rewritten as "Columbia Studio B, Columbia Studio E, New York"? Furthermore, New York isn't a studio, yet it's being listed like one. This effort to ban prepositions strikes me as misguided minimalism; they can only help. Dan56 ( talk) 20:23, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
It adds nothing to the presentation and many times full size is best. I had thought that <small> was deprecated – especially in infoboxes. Jodosma (talk) 18:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
<small><small/>
is not completely ruled out. And I didn't know that it was deprecated either.
De728631 (
talk) 20:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
<small>
will make it fall below 85%.
nyuszika7h (
talk) 22:38, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
<small><small/>
is completely ruled out, in all circumstances: it will put the page in
Category:Pages using invalid self-closed HTML tags; the correct form is <small>...</small>
. As for deprecation, the HTML5 spec for
the small
element says thet it "represents side comments such as small print" and "Small print typically features disclaimers, caveats, legal restrictions, or copyrights. Small print is also sometimes used for attribution, or for satisfying licensing requirements." The implication is that the element has a particular semantic meaning, and should not be used merely for reducing font size. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 08:00, 17 September 2016 (UTC)I think that the code shown under Template:Infobox_album#Advanced_usage is defective, as evidenced by previous revisions of Honor Is Dead. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 18:26, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Every album has album cover artwork. Because of this, I'm proposing that someone implement the code to create a maintenance category of Category:Albums with missing cover, similar to Category:Books with missing cover. This would make it much easier to process articles that have a missing album cover in the infobox. Thanks, TheKaphox T 19:19, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
I wanted to put on Chicago 17 the credit for mastering for George Marino. [7] I don't see a way to do this using the template as it stands-any ideas? DadaNeem ( talk) 19:48, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
For album durations that are over an hour, is it preferred to format the length as 1:10:00 or as 70:00? TheKaphox T 21:58, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
I want to make a one-off album by a solo artist part of his band's chronology but not display the solo artist's "chronology" (since he doesn't have one apart from the one-off). The specific case is Sly Stone, who did the album High on You under his own name but did all his other work (much of it solo in all but name) as Sly & the Family Stone. Is it OK to do this? Or should I just settle for displaying both the solo chronology (such as it it) and the group one? -- Middle 8 ( t • c | privacy • COI) 16:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC) (italicize title 20:17, 5 December 2016 (UTC))
Can the parameters of {{ italic title}} be passed through so we can use those in this template if needed? Specifically {{{all}}} so we can specify the text in parentheses to be italicized as well. Maybe something like {{italic title|all={{ifeq:{{{italic title}}}|all|yes}} }}. {{{String}}} and {{{1}}} (for noerror) should probably be likewise added. This would help with people trying to override the displayed title by other ways and generate errors. Voxii ( talk) 19:01, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
|Italic title=no
and make their own italics with {{
italic title|all=yes}}
or whatever they want. There are several infoboxes using {{
italic title}} and I don't think a parameter name making no sense in an infobox context should be duplicated. Most users paying enough attention to the documentation to learn about |all=yes
would also learn about |Italic title=no
.
PrimeHunter (
talk) 19:26, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I remember this came up several times some years ago (and if I recall correctly, buried without establishing consensus), but I'm still very puzzled that there isn't a infobox type for the DJ mix album. I feel simply calling them compilation albums are to the discredit of the DJ, and to the presentation of the content. Remix albums are similarly wrong as they aren't compilations of remixes, or if they are its not the point. The ambiguity of ' mixtape' again feels distant. Surely nowhere on the internet are you gonna find DJ mix albums referred to as mixtapes, or remix albums. Compilations maybe, but DJ mix albums are distinct enough, the work of the DJ as opposed to just a various artists comp. This mess has lead to all different affairs across Wikipedia, with some DJ mix albums saying " compilation album by (DJ)" (which implies these albums are compilation of songs by that artist, which they are not), " compilation album (mixtape)" and " Remix album by (DJ)", when this inconsistent mess could all be clearly wiped up if they just all said "DJ mix album by (DJ)", or if its possible, "DJ mix album mixed by (DJ)", if that's any better. If we have the Category:DJ mix albums, and an article on them, I don't see why they aren't acknowledged as an album type infoboxes.-- TangoTizerWolfstone ( talk) 19:00, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
A request for comments has been opened at WT:WikiProject Songs#RfC: Should Infobox single and Infobox song be merged? Please add your comments there. — Ojorojo ( talk) 17:32, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:INFOBOXUSE the chronology field should contain links to existing articles. Occasionally I come upon an album infobox which contains a red or black link because the next chronological album doesn't yet have an article or isn't notable enough for an article (and may possibly never be notable enough), but there are articles on succeeding albums which cannot be reached via the navigation field of the album infobox, meaning I have to either scroll down to the bottom of the article to open up the nav box down there, or go to the artist's discography to find which is the next album we have an article on. I propose a return to the original wording which was amended after this discussion about including all album types. The wording "This group of fields establishes a chain connecting articles about an artist's album" - which makes it clear that the field is for navigation between articles, to "This group of fields establishes a timeline of an artist's releases". I can see how in the general flow of the discussion in which the participants were reaching for inclusivity of album types, that the word "timeline" was used, but the result is that it makes it appear as though all albums should be placed there, regardless of whether we have an article, which is at odds with the purpose of the navigation field per WP:SIDEBAR to navigate readers to related articles. My proposal is that the first paragraph be changed from:
to:
Comments? SilkTork ✔Tea time 12:44, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@ Jc86035: Your last edits removed italic title from a lot of articles, e.g. London Calling Did you test your edits any place - this template is transcluded by 144098 pages. Christian75 ( talk) 08:13, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
What is with the shift I see in some track listings? Odd (Shinee album) is an example. -- Jennica✿ / talk 01:20, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
|Next album=
instead of |misc=
. I've fixed that article. —
JJMC89 (
T·
C) 02:45, 14 May 2017 (UTC)@
Jc86035: if there is no |chronology=
in the infobox, it produces "Artist chronology" in the header; if it is included but empty (chronology=[is empty]), it produces just "chronology". I think these should both produce "Artist album chronology" (the current {{
Infobox single}} follows this, with both producing "Artist singles chronology"). —
Ojorojo (
talk) 17:52, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
|tracks=
and/or {{
Extra collapsed text}} seems to be causing problems with infobox songs (fields pushed to right) (see song's from
Beggars Banquet before I removed the field). —
Ojorojo (
talk) 00:34, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
|track_no=
is filled in, it seems to display properly. Without it, it's pushed to the right. —
Ojorojo (
talk) 01:39, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
We need a new tracking category to capture all the instances of | Type =
being empty. I'm creating some of them in my clean up of the infobox; there's so much incorrect stuff in the Type field that its easier to blank the rubbish entries rather than repair them as I edit. @
TheFrog001: is doing a sterling job in populating the blank occurrences with the correct values, but a maintenance category would make life so much easier to track them down and show the outstanding workload. Any objections? -
X201 (
talk) 15:14, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
In these two pages the entire article gets swallowed up in the infobox. For some reason it doesn't happen on Collection_(2NE1_album) or Fever_(Kylie_Minogue_album) 66.234.193.114 ( talk) 00:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
@ Jc86035: I've reverted the bot's attempted substitution at Babylon 5, as it left a pile of wikicode visible down in the "Music and scoring" section. When I edited the bot's revision, removed the HTML comment after "Infobox album", and tried "Show changes", the subst went through correctly. So possibly an HTML comment in that position is confusing Module:Unsubst-infobox? -- John of Reading ( talk) 10:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
subst:
and the template name; HTML comment tags at any point between the opening braces and the first pipe. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 11:19, 19 May 2017 (UTC)For no clear reason, whether to keep or change or remove something in this template is being heavily discussed at the talk page of an entirely different template. Please see Template talk:Infobox song#… and a bugbear: partial track listing. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 03:31, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
On a sidenote - was there a recent change to the infobox to suppress any attempt to use vertical bulleted lists in, say, the studio parameter? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 ( talk • contributions) 05:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
See Lei'd in Hawaii, Smile (The Beach Boys album), Andy Paley sessions. -- Ilovetopaint ( talk) 06:32, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
It appears that the template has been changed so that if Release= is blank but there is a date in Chronology for current album, then the release date is copied from the chronology field. This is not a positive change: it's normal in jazz discographies to list by recording date, not release date, and the latter is often unknown. This change forces potentially erroneous (and unsourced) information into the Release field display, when the Chronology uses recording dates. I was forced into this as a crude avoidance measure. Changing it back, so that Release= must be completed manually, would be advisable. EddieHugh ( talk) 22:46, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
I think there should be two available sets of chronology fields, for example so that an infobox on an article for a studio album of a band with a large, complex discography, there can be one chronology that shows the next and previous studio album, and a second chronology that shows the next and previous official release of any kind. CJK09 ( talk · contribs) 17:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
{{Infobox album ... | misc = {{Extra chronology | artist = | type = | prev_title = | prev_year = | title = | year = | next_title = | next_year = }} }}
After trying at WP:EIS and WP:VPT, maybe I'm finally in the right place to get this solved. The current border for album art is much too faint. Observe at Darkness in a Different Light (or a screenshot from my end in case it's brower-specific: [8]) It wasn't like that a few years ago, but somehow it's become lighter—to the point where it's barely visible. I request that the grey be made darker, or even black. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 18:10, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
img.thumbborder {
border: 1px solid #eaecf0;
}
#eaecf0
- which is - to another
valid colour value. So for a 50% grey like this you would use the value #808080
--
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 22:30, 13 August 2017 (UTC)This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
| italic title= {{{italic_title|{{{italic title|{{{Italic title|}}}}}}}}}
with
| italic title= {{{italic_title|{{{italic title|{{{Italic title|<noinclude>no</noinclude>}}}}}}}}}
so this template page title doesn't italicize. Hddty. ( talk) 16:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
{{
edit template-protected}}
template. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 19:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
| italic title= {{{italic_title|{{{italic title|{{{Italic title|}}}}}}}}}
| italic title= {{{italic_title|<noinclude>no</noinclude>{{{italic title|<noinclude>no</noinclude>{{{Italic title|<noinclude>no</noinclude>}}}}}}}}}
<noinclude>no</noinclude>
. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 08:30, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Am I missing something here? Why doesn't italic_title = no
cover your needs? Which article is it failing to work on? -
X201 (
talk) 11:53, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
How does Category:Music infoboxes with unknown value for type get populated? I can't spot any mention of it in the template code. Is there another module that is doing the work? The reason I ask is that it appears to not be recognising "other" as a valid entry for type. - X201 ( talk) 13:58, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
I've been looking unsuccesfully into why on so many articles using {{
Infobox album}}
are ending up in the
Category:Music infoboxes with deprecated parameters. Originally I was just trying to fix the error on
The Room (film) but it looks like this issue is much bigger with over 150,000 articles in the deprecated parameters category. Did something break or am I missing some sort of easy fix? I'm just very confused at this point sadly.
Jeanjung212 (
talk) 18:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Artist
and artist
are different). An easy fix is to do a
subst, i.e. subst:Infobox album
. You just put this prefix there, then the template code cleans itself up automagically. (Auxiliary templates like {{
Extra chronology}} and {{
Singles}}, if present, may require the same treatment). Still a tedious work on that many articles, perhaps a bot should do this. —
Mike Novikoff 21:50, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I am wondering what an album that consists of home/cassette/etc. recordings as opposed to music recorded in a studio would be classed as, as it doesn't currently seem to be clear (and suggests the article on album types needs updating). FamblyCat94 ( talk) 01:23, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
I think there is a technical problem with this infobox, which doesn't exist in most other infoboxes. The page preview feature works like a "tool tip": when a reader hovers the mouse pointer over a wikilink, a box pops up with some of the linked article's lead text, and identifying image if there is one. The image is taken from the infobox if there is one, otherwise the top image is selected. This must default to disabled for logged-in users, and to enabled for IP users; that's how I found it by accident.
When I preview wikilinks to album pages, the lead text comes up but the cover photo in the infobox does not.
I wondered if this maybe is due to the pictures being fair-use, but I can prove that's not it: hover on this link to Superman, and you'll see the fair-use picture shows in the preview. So Template:infobox comics character doesn't have the problem.
If you're unfamiliar with this feature, it is enabled from your Preferences under the Appearance tab: set the radio button under Reading preferences: Page views. Notice the little note underneath it says "Certain gadgets and other customizations may affect the performance of this feature. If you experience problems please review your gadgets and user scripts, including global ones." I think that's what's going on here.
I don't know much about the technical details of template writing, or I would look into it myself. Can someone with such knowledge look into this and fix it? (If not, iss there another talk or help page I could post this question to? I haven't been able to find a WP page which explains the page preview option.) JustinTime55 ( talk) 19:34, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox album has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please fix problem: does not work properly with page preview feature: when reader hovers mouse pointer over a wikilink to an album page with this infobox, the album cover image does not show up in the preview window. (Example: Don't Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers: page preview shows lead text but no cover image.) This works properly for some infoboxes (e.g.: infobox comics character: Superman page preview works properly. JustinTime55 ( talk) 20:26, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
No, that burecratic bullshit doesn't cut it. I made the request as clear as I could by demonstrating the problem. I don't know what the technical solution to the problem is, so I can't possibly say "change X to Y". The request is to please solve the problem and kindly fix it.
I am a professional computer programmer; if one of my customers asked me to solve a software problem and I said, "I can't do that; please tell me what code to change", I'd be fired. JustinTime55 ( talk) 21:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
@ JustinTime55: It doesn't seem to be doing that now. In other words, works on my machine. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 06:28, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
In the template, the set up is made to include equal spacing, however, certain editors continue to remove the spacing, and make it one space between the "=" and the other media. For example — and I am going to use the Man of the Woods template for example — if we go by what the template calls, the infobox [should] look like this when editing:
{{Infobox album | name = Man of the Woods | type = studio | artist = [[Justin Timberlake]] | cover = Justin Timberlake - Man of the Woods (Official Album Cover).png | alt = Cover image features two images of a male, edited to appear as one. Top-half image features male in all-black suit and white undershirt, in a snow-covered wooded area. Bottom-half image features male in ripped blue jeans, flannel button down shirt in a smog-filled wooded area. Text is featured in handwritten print. | border = yes | released = {{Start date|2018|02|02|mf=yes}} | recorded = 2016–2017 | studio = {{hlist|[[Conway Recording Studios]], [[Los Angeles]]|[[EastWest Studios]], Los Angeles|[[Jungle City Studios]], [[New York City]]|[[Red Bull Music Academy|Red Bull Studios]], [[Sao Paulo]]}} | genre = {{hlist|[[Pop music|Pop]]|[[Electronic music|electronic]]|[[Contemporary R&B|R&B]]<ref name="genres"/>}} | length = {{duration|m=65|s=54}} | label = [[RCA Records|RCA]] | producer = {{hlist|Justin Timberlake (also [[Executive producer#Music|exec.]])|[[Danja (producer)|Danja]]|[[1500 or Nothin'|Larrance Dopson]]|[[Jerome "J-Roc" Harmon]]|[[Eric Hudson]]|Elliott Ives|[[Rob Knox (producer)|Rob Knox]]|[[The Neptunes]]|[[Timbaland]]}} | prev_title = [[The 20/20 Experience – 2 of 2]] | prev_year = 2013 | year = 2018 | next_title = | next_year = | misc = {{Singles | name = Man of the Woods | type = studio | single1 = [[Filthy (song)|Filthy]] | single1date = January 5, 2018 | single2 = [[Supplies (song)|Supplies]] | single2date = January 18, 2018 | single3 = [[Say Something (Justin Timberlake song)|Say Something]] | single3date = January 25, 2018 <!-- Sorry, but an album cover is not a [[Wikipedia:RS|reliable source]] that dictates when singles are coming out. Please find a [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]] third-party source to prove that "Man of the Woods" is the fourth single. --> }} }}
However, if users do the one space between, it would look like this — which I believe is a bit messy to look at and edit:
{{Infobox album | name = Man of the Woods | type = studio | artist = [[Justin Timberlake]] | cover = Justin Timberlake - Man of the Woods (Official Album Cover).png | border = yes | alt = The cover image features two images of a male, edited to appear as one. Top-diagonal-half image features male in all-black suit and white undershirt, in a snow-covered wooded area. Bottom-diagonal-half image features male in ripped blue jeans, flannel button down shirt in a smog-filled wooded area. Below this title: MAN OF THE WOODS, appears in capitalised handwritten print. | released = {{start date|2018|2|2}} | recorded = 2016–2017 | studio = {{hlist|[[Conway Recording Studios]], [[Los Angeles]]|[[EastWest Studios]], Los Angeles|[[Jungle City Studios]], [[New York City]]|[[Red Bull Music Academy|Red Bull Studios]], [[Sao Paulo]]}} | genre = {{hlist|[[Pop music|Pop]]|[[Contemporary R&B|R&B]]|[[Electronic music|electronic]]<ref name="genres"/>}} | length = {{duration|m=65|s=54}} | label = [[RCA Records|RCA]] | producer = {{hlist|Justin Timberlake (also [[Executive producer#Music|exec.]])|[[Danja (producer)|Danja]]|[[1500 or Nothin'|Larrance Dopson]]|[[Jerome "J-Roc" Harmon]]|[[Eric Hudson]]|Elliott Ives|[[Rob Knox (producer)|Rob Knox]]|[[The Neptunes]]|[[Timbaland]]}} | prev_title = [[The 20/20 Experience – 2 of 2]] | prev_year = 2013 | year = 2018 | next_title = | next_year = | misc = {{Singles | name = Man of the Woods | type = studio | single1 = [[Filthy (song)|Filthy]] | single1date = January 5, 2018 | single2 = [[Supplies (song)|Supplies]] | single2date = January 18, 2018 | single3 = [[Say Something (Justin Timberlake song)|Say Something]] | single3date = January 25, 2018 <!-- Sorry, but an album cover is not a [[Wikipedia:RS|reliable source]] that dictates when singles are coming out. Please find a [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]] third-party source to prove that "Man of the Woods" is the fourth single. --> }} }}
Which is the proper format to be used to end potential edit-warring once and for all? Also, I started up a discussion about {{ Start date}} here, which might also pertain to this page, as well. Hope we can put an edit to this. livelikemusic talk! 15:08, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
{{Infobox album | name = | type = | artist = | cover = | alt = | released = <!-- {{Start date|||}} --> | recorded = | venue = | studio = | genre = <!-- Do not add unsourced genres --> | length = | label = | producer = | prev_title = | prev_year = | next_title = | next_year = }}
— Ojorojo ( talk) 19:01, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
|alt=
aligns with the "d" in |released=
). —
Ojorojo (
talk) 21:43, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Ojorojo, are your settings set to use monospaced font in your edit window ("Edit area font style")? If they are and the characters in this sentence don't all have the same width, then you might have a font problem somewhere. If you aren't using monospaced font in the edit window, then the equals signs in the second example won't be aligned. Jc86035 ( talk) 07:59, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I just a version of this template to copy and paste. That's all I'm asking for. -- 80.3.85.48 ( talk) 17:50, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
This is the first I've noticed a change to infobox album. Which parameters have been deprecated? Why was any of it done? It looked better the old way. Changing something as extensive as the album template strikes me as a solution looking for a problem. A good editor knows when something should be left alone and when something should be changed. All of the people who have worked on infobox templates up until now, particularly IP users, are going to wonder what the standard is. For example, lowercase or uppercase for the field names, prev title instead of prev album.
Vmavanti (
talk) 01:51, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
There is a new magic word for short descriptions (used on mobile, apps, search...) which gets populated on enwiki through Template:Short description. More than 800,000 pages already have a short description, either directly or through some logic in an infobox template. This is e.g. implemented in Template:Infobox settlement without much problems (though improvements are always welcome!). The changes there [10] are relatively complicated, the local description we could generate here could be a lot simpler; "'type' album by 'artist'" (adding year would make it somewhat more complicated).
Anyone feels up to actually writing the code for this? Fram ( talk) 14:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello. In this infobox, I believe that the "caption" parameter should only be used if absolutely necessary; eg. to distinguish a specific version of an album cover that is shown in the infobox. However, I see a lot of album articles (particularly in Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronic Music, and related to the record label Monstercat) that have every cover with the caption "Cover art" ( example). I believe this is compeltely pointless, unnecessary, and that these captions that serve no purpose should be removed.
I have also crossposted this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronic music and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music. Thanks, Lazz _R 18:02, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Photographs and other graphics should have captions, unless they are unambiguous depictions of the subject of the article or when they are "self-captioning" images (such as reproductions of album or book covers).MOS:CAPTION — JJMC89 ( T· C) 23:40, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
There is an RFC on removing genres from infoboxes at WT:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Request for comment on removing genres from musician, album, and song infoboxes — BillHPike ( talk, contribs) 16:22, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I have run into issues with the substitution trick resulting in errors
like this where it states "String Module Error: Match not found" for the next album in a chronology. I am wondering what causes this? I have been running some sandbox tests and it occurs with non-existent pages (my initial hunch), but also with existing articles.
Does anyone have any knowledge as to the cause? Any help is greatly appreciated. (Also, feel free to play around with it in
my bot's sandbox if you like) --
TheSandDoctor
Talk 03:01, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
|next_year=
causes it. Extra punctucation, letters, etc., in some parameters will also cause an error (see
Category:Music infoboxes with Module:String errors). —
Ojorojo (
talk) 14:17, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
|released=Unreleased
is not recognized. It must contain a four number year, which is used in the chronology. It could be worked around using |misc=
{{
Extra chronology}}, but it doesn't seem that an unreleased album belongs in a chronology of released albums. —
Ojorojo (
talk) 15:54, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
I am in the process of clearing out Category:Music infoboxes with deprecated parameters and Category:Music infoboxes with Module:String errors. With backlogs of 149K and 7.1K articles respectively, it's impossible to do it in one go. I've made it down approximately to "Be", as you can see the only remaining pages from 0-Be are those which are in userspace, nominated for deletion or lack information to solve the Module:String error.
Since I started keeping track, the backlogs have been significantly reduced - the first category by around 8.7% (~13K articles), and the second category backlog by around 6.3% (~450 articles). I would gladly appreciate more help in tackling these issues, as the magnitude of articles in these categories is quite daunting. With the current template format it's much easier to avoid silly formatting errors and help ensure consistent usage. I have repaired a bunch more so that the templates are using non-deprecated parameters and the current simplified syntax. Generally any extra comments or weird formatting would trigger a Module:String error, i.e. unclosed italics, using the wrong bracket, having a template where a string is expected. Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:52, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
|studio=
and |venue=
. Albums seldom include both studio and live tracks. Maybe subst: could only produce studio, since it is the most common (subst: leaves out several other lesser used parameters, such as longtype, language, director, compiler, etc.) —
Ojorojo (
talk) 16:05, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Frietjes, Jon Kolbert, and TheSandDoctor: Sorry I didn't find this discussion until now. To briefly expand on X201's explanation, I for some reason built all of the replacement code on multiple nested layers of if parser functions and Module:String, and I do not want to touch it any more because it would be a fairly painful experience to wade through that code and figure out how to fix the imperfections. It was basically as good as I could have made it at the time.
The error on the blank Released field is probably intentional because I wanted to require a date for all three chronology fields before the error would go away. This is clearly not the best solution because it requires an editor to manually find all of the dates, but maybe in the next bot run the errors could simply be removed in a second edit, and a tracking category could be added for chronologies without all of the years filled in. Jc86035 ( talk) 21:32, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
This is just a not-very-useful note to say that this problem still exists. I haven't looked into the causes, but my diff may help develop a solution for what may be one of many pathological cases. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 18:53, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
''[[Genius of Modern Music: Volume 1]]''''<br />(1947)
. They're a pain to code for because there are so many possibilities, I'm doing a clean up of infoboxes at the moment too and have fallen foul of this a couple of times. Also, as a heads up, look out for any Frank Zappa albums, someone has gone through all of those and repurposed the field; adding a chronological discography number to the album name, this also breaks the template updating subst routine because it's unexpected content. I tend to sigh and look forward to the day when we've managed to plough though everything and albums and years are neatly in their own fields. -
X201 (
talk) 07:31, 8 October 2018 (UTC)<br />
that caused the error. -
X201 (
talk) 09:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
@ Frietjes: How should unreleased albums be handled? I've hit a problem with The Black Room (The KLF album). I get a string module error in the chronology because there is no release date for the album, obviously, being unreleased it's never going to have one. How can the template be fixed to handle this situation? Because this isn't a one off Category:Unreleased albums - X201 ( talk) 07:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
@ X201, Frietjes, and Jc86035: so just an update, I've gotten started on cleaning up the deprecations and I found something that definitely does appear to be broken... Category:Music infoboxes with Module:String errors is populated with tons of pages that don't appear to have any actual errors. Any chance one of you can take a look and see if you can figure out what is going wrong? Thanks in advance. -- Zackmann ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 18:45, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
@ Frietjes: So curious what you think of the way this template is currently laid out... I get the goal here was to be able to quickly subst the template and fix... but WOAH. Any chance you can work your magic? -- Zackmann ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 07:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Whether commas should be eliminated altogether or[Entries in field] should be separated by using commas, {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}}.[1] [1] For short horizontal lists of two or three items, comma separators are acceptable, but for longer lists the use of {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}} is preferred as they offer a benefit to users of screen readers. Vertical lists should always be implemented by {{ plainlist}} or {{ ubl}} and never by
<br />
tags for reasons of accessibility.
class =
be added is not part of this proposal and needs to be discussed separately. —
Ojorojo (
talk) 14:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Several music infobox templates have the same parameters, but different explanations/guidelines. For example, "Genre":
These should be harmonized, along with other common parameters including "Label", "Producer", "Format", and "Writer". (Infoboxes single and song specify {{ Plainlist}} for "Recorded", probably because they don't have separate date and "Venue" and "Studio" parameters; these can be changed when added). The standard parameter guideline with explanatory footnote used in Infobox musical artist should cover all:
[Entries in field] should be separated by using commas, {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}}.[1] [1] For short horizontal lists of two or three items, comma separators are acceptable, but for longer lists the use of {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}} is preferred as they offer a benefit to users of screen readers. Vertical lists should always be implemented by {{ plainlist}} or {{ ubl}} and never by
<br />
tags for reasons of accessibility.
Are there any objections to adding this? — Ojorojo ( talk) 15:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Producer =
allows for the optional use of {{
flatlist}}, right? This was added over three years ago
[1] and is consistent with
MOS:HLIST. This option is used in many album GAs, including for Genre =
and Label =
; adding it here and harmonizing with other infobox guidelines just adopts accepted practice. One's personal preference does not make it "correct". —
Ojorojo (
talk) 14:16, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
{{
flatlist}}
{{
plainlist}}
{{
hlist}}
etc. is largely presentational, the important thing is that lists should be semantically marked up as such. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 14:56, 2 August 2016 (UTC)For two or three [field entries], use commas for separation. For four or more, use {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}}.[1] [1] For short horizontal lists of two or three items, comma separators are acceptable, but for longer lists the use of {{ flatlist}} or {{ hlist}} is preferred as they offer a benefit to users of screen readers. Vertical lists should always be implemented by {{ plainlist}} or {{ ubl}} and never by
<br />
tags for reasons of accessibility.
Should middots also be used in place of commas that are in Americanized recording dates ([month] [day] [comma] [year])? Think of cases where punctuation and prepositions would benefit the layout in infobox parameters like "Recorded" and "Studio". September 1, 2, and 5, 1971; October 5, 1973, for example. Dan56 ( talk) 20:16, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
I would like clarification on the format of this field, and for it to be included in the MOS for this template. Since 2008, albeit before the separate Recorded field was introduced, I have used this format:
1 January – 8 April 2014 at [Studio name] in New York City
However, recently I've been seeing something like this in the Studio field:
... or even <small> text being used for the studio. What's the deal there, and all the commas? To me it looks very awkward if the [Studio], [City], [State] format is used, rather than [Studio] in [City], [State]. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 00:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
or
You do realize that Studio =
is its own parameter now, right? For live recordings, it's Venue =
. The only thing that should be in the Recorded =
parameter, is the recording dates. Also for the record, there's no guidance around adding the provenance of the studio or venue, so it's fair to add it. Linking should be within the
WP:OVERLINK guideline. In other words, if the city is well-known, such as Los Angeles, New York, London, Paris, Berlin, etc., don't even link the city name. Linking the province or state is probably not required per that guideline. If the country is listed, don't link it at all. If three or more entries are to be used, use a list template. Based on the example, I would use
Abbey Road Studios, London
(backlinks broken for example here) and not "in London".
And for the record, if the editors at infobox song want to get with the programme, they could add the parameters, and harmonize their list requirements with this template all at the same time. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 03:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
{{small|}}
text for any infobox parameters.
Mac Dreamstate (
talk) 17:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Back to the original question, is it "Abbey Road Studios, London" or "Abbey Road Studios in London"? I count five editors in favor of commas (Walter Gorlitz, Piriczki, Ilovetopaint, JG66, Ojorojo) and two opposed (MacDreamstate, Dan56). Is there consensus or not? Piriczki ( talk) 19:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
@ JG66:, if you cant see how there would be cases where prepositions would be more useful than strictly punctuation, then you clearly lack imagination. Dan56 ( talk) 20:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
@ Nyuszika7h:, @ Piriczki:, @ Walter Görlitz:, @ Ojorojo:, should prepositions also be avoided when listing several recording dates? Think of cases where punctuation and prepositions would benefit the layout in infobox parameters like "Recorded": September 1, 2, and 5, 1971 at Electric Lady Studios in New York; October 5, 1973, and January 1, 1974, at the Record Plant in Los Angeles (for example). This isn't uncommon, and it's ridiculous to limit editors to punctuation. Consider Big Fun (Miles Davis album): "Columbia Studios B and E, New York" (emphasis added). Should "and" be removed and the line be rewritten as "Columbia Studio B, Columbia Studio E, New York"? Furthermore, New York isn't a studio, yet it's being listed like one. This effort to ban prepositions strikes me as misguided minimalism; they can only help. Dan56 ( talk) 20:23, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
It adds nothing to the presentation and many times full size is best. I had thought that <small> was deprecated – especially in infoboxes. Jodosma (talk) 18:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
<small><small/>
is not completely ruled out. And I didn't know that it was deprecated either.
De728631 (
talk) 20:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
<small>
will make it fall below 85%.
nyuszika7h (
talk) 22:38, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
<small><small/>
is completely ruled out, in all circumstances: it will put the page in
Category:Pages using invalid self-closed HTML tags; the correct form is <small>...</small>
. As for deprecation, the HTML5 spec for
the small
element says thet it "represents side comments such as small print" and "Small print typically features disclaimers, caveats, legal restrictions, or copyrights. Small print is also sometimes used for attribution, or for satisfying licensing requirements." The implication is that the element has a particular semantic meaning, and should not be used merely for reducing font size. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 08:00, 17 September 2016 (UTC)I think that the code shown under Template:Infobox_album#Advanced_usage is defective, as evidenced by previous revisions of Honor Is Dead. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 18:26, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Every album has album cover artwork. Because of this, I'm proposing that someone implement the code to create a maintenance category of Category:Albums with missing cover, similar to Category:Books with missing cover. This would make it much easier to process articles that have a missing album cover in the infobox. Thanks, TheKaphox T 19:19, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
I wanted to put on Chicago 17 the credit for mastering for George Marino. [7] I don't see a way to do this using the template as it stands-any ideas? DadaNeem ( talk) 19:48, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
For album durations that are over an hour, is it preferred to format the length as 1:10:00 or as 70:00? TheKaphox T 21:58, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
I want to make a one-off album by a solo artist part of his band's chronology but not display the solo artist's "chronology" (since he doesn't have one apart from the one-off). The specific case is Sly Stone, who did the album High on You under his own name but did all his other work (much of it solo in all but name) as Sly & the Family Stone. Is it OK to do this? Or should I just settle for displaying both the solo chronology (such as it it) and the group one? -- Middle 8 ( t • c | privacy • COI) 16:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC) (italicize title 20:17, 5 December 2016 (UTC))
Can the parameters of {{ italic title}} be passed through so we can use those in this template if needed? Specifically {{{all}}} so we can specify the text in parentheses to be italicized as well. Maybe something like {{italic title|all={{ifeq:{{{italic title}}}|all|yes}} }}. {{{String}}} and {{{1}}} (for noerror) should probably be likewise added. This would help with people trying to override the displayed title by other ways and generate errors. Voxii ( talk) 19:01, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
|Italic title=no
and make their own italics with {{
italic title|all=yes}}
or whatever they want. There are several infoboxes using {{
italic title}} and I don't think a parameter name making no sense in an infobox context should be duplicated. Most users paying enough attention to the documentation to learn about |all=yes
would also learn about |Italic title=no
.
PrimeHunter (
talk) 19:26, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I remember this came up several times some years ago (and if I recall correctly, buried without establishing consensus), but I'm still very puzzled that there isn't a infobox type for the DJ mix album. I feel simply calling them compilation albums are to the discredit of the DJ, and to the presentation of the content. Remix albums are similarly wrong as they aren't compilations of remixes, or if they are its not the point. The ambiguity of ' mixtape' again feels distant. Surely nowhere on the internet are you gonna find DJ mix albums referred to as mixtapes, or remix albums. Compilations maybe, but DJ mix albums are distinct enough, the work of the DJ as opposed to just a various artists comp. This mess has lead to all different affairs across Wikipedia, with some DJ mix albums saying " compilation album by (DJ)" (which implies these albums are compilation of songs by that artist, which they are not), " compilation album (mixtape)" and " Remix album by (DJ)", when this inconsistent mess could all be clearly wiped up if they just all said "DJ mix album by (DJ)", or if its possible, "DJ mix album mixed by (DJ)", if that's any better. If we have the Category:DJ mix albums, and an article on them, I don't see why they aren't acknowledged as an album type infoboxes.-- TangoTizerWolfstone ( talk) 19:00, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
A request for comments has been opened at WT:WikiProject Songs#RfC: Should Infobox single and Infobox song be merged? Please add your comments there. — Ojorojo ( talk) 17:32, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:INFOBOXUSE the chronology field should contain links to existing articles. Occasionally I come upon an album infobox which contains a red or black link because the next chronological album doesn't yet have an article or isn't notable enough for an article (and may possibly never be notable enough), but there are articles on succeeding albums which cannot be reached via the navigation field of the album infobox, meaning I have to either scroll down to the bottom of the article to open up the nav box down there, or go to the artist's discography to find which is the next album we have an article on. I propose a return to the original wording which was amended after this discussion about including all album types. The wording "This group of fields establishes a chain connecting articles about an artist's album" - which makes it clear that the field is for navigation between articles, to "This group of fields establishes a timeline of an artist's releases". I can see how in the general flow of the discussion in which the participants were reaching for inclusivity of album types, that the word "timeline" was used, but the result is that it makes it appear as though all albums should be placed there, regardless of whether we have an article, which is at odds with the purpose of the navigation field per WP:SIDEBAR to navigate readers to related articles. My proposal is that the first paragraph be changed from:
to:
Comments? SilkTork ✔Tea time 12:44, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@ Jc86035: Your last edits removed italic title from a lot of articles, e.g. London Calling Did you test your edits any place - this template is transcluded by 144098 pages. Christian75 ( talk) 08:13, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
What is with the shift I see in some track listings? Odd (Shinee album) is an example. -- Jennica✿ / talk 01:20, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
|Next album=
instead of |misc=
. I've fixed that article. —
JJMC89 (
T·
C) 02:45, 14 May 2017 (UTC)@
Jc86035: if there is no |chronology=
in the infobox, it produces "Artist chronology" in the header; if it is included but empty (chronology=[is empty]), it produces just "chronology". I think these should both produce "Artist album chronology" (the current {{
Infobox single}} follows this, with both producing "Artist singles chronology"). —
Ojorojo (
talk) 17:52, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
|tracks=
and/or {{
Extra collapsed text}} seems to be causing problems with infobox songs (fields pushed to right) (see song's from
Beggars Banquet before I removed the field). —
Ojorojo (
talk) 00:34, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
|track_no=
is filled in, it seems to display properly. Without it, it's pushed to the right. —
Ojorojo (
talk) 01:39, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
We need a new tracking category to capture all the instances of | Type =
being empty. I'm creating some of them in my clean up of the infobox; there's so much incorrect stuff in the Type field that its easier to blank the rubbish entries rather than repair them as I edit. @
TheFrog001: is doing a sterling job in populating the blank occurrences with the correct values, but a maintenance category would make life so much easier to track them down and show the outstanding workload. Any objections? -
X201 (
talk) 15:14, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
In these two pages the entire article gets swallowed up in the infobox. For some reason it doesn't happen on Collection_(2NE1_album) or Fever_(Kylie_Minogue_album) 66.234.193.114 ( talk) 00:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
@ Jc86035: I've reverted the bot's attempted substitution at Babylon 5, as it left a pile of wikicode visible down in the "Music and scoring" section. When I edited the bot's revision, removed the HTML comment after "Infobox album", and tried "Show changes", the subst went through correctly. So possibly an HTML comment in that position is confusing Module:Unsubst-infobox? -- John of Reading ( talk) 10:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
subst:
and the template name; HTML comment tags at any point between the opening braces and the first pipe. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 11:19, 19 May 2017 (UTC)For no clear reason, whether to keep or change or remove something in this template is being heavily discussed at the talk page of an entirely different template. Please see Template talk:Infobox song#… and a bugbear: partial track listing. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 03:31, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
On a sidenote - was there a recent change to the infobox to suppress any attempt to use vertical bulleted lists in, say, the studio parameter? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 ( talk • contributions) 05:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
See Lei'd in Hawaii, Smile (The Beach Boys album), Andy Paley sessions. -- Ilovetopaint ( talk) 06:32, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
It appears that the template has been changed so that if Release= is blank but there is a date in Chronology for current album, then the release date is copied from the chronology field. This is not a positive change: it's normal in jazz discographies to list by recording date, not release date, and the latter is often unknown. This change forces potentially erroneous (and unsourced) information into the Release field display, when the Chronology uses recording dates. I was forced into this as a crude avoidance measure. Changing it back, so that Release= must be completed manually, would be advisable. EddieHugh ( talk) 22:46, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
I think there should be two available sets of chronology fields, for example so that an infobox on an article for a studio album of a band with a large, complex discography, there can be one chronology that shows the next and previous studio album, and a second chronology that shows the next and previous official release of any kind. CJK09 ( talk · contribs) 17:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
{{Infobox album ... | misc = {{Extra chronology | artist = | type = | prev_title = | prev_year = | title = | year = | next_title = | next_year = }} }}
After trying at WP:EIS and WP:VPT, maybe I'm finally in the right place to get this solved. The current border for album art is much too faint. Observe at Darkness in a Different Light (or a screenshot from my end in case it's brower-specific: [8]) It wasn't like that a few years ago, but somehow it's become lighter—to the point where it's barely visible. I request that the grey be made darker, or even black. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 18:10, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
img.thumbborder {
border: 1px solid #eaecf0;
}
#eaecf0
- which is - to another
valid colour value. So for a 50% grey like this you would use the value #808080
--
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 22:30, 13 August 2017 (UTC)This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
| italic title= {{{italic_title|{{{italic title|{{{Italic title|}}}}}}}}}
with
| italic title= {{{italic_title|{{{italic title|{{{Italic title|<noinclude>no</noinclude>}}}}}}}}}
so this template page title doesn't italicize. Hddty. ( talk) 16:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
{{
edit template-protected}}
template. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 19:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
| italic title= {{{italic_title|{{{italic title|{{{Italic title|}}}}}}}}}
| italic title= {{{italic_title|<noinclude>no</noinclude>{{{italic title|<noinclude>no</noinclude>{{{Italic title|<noinclude>no</noinclude>}}}}}}}}}
<noinclude>no</noinclude>
. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 08:30, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Am I missing something here? Why doesn't italic_title = no
cover your needs? Which article is it failing to work on? -
X201 (
talk) 11:53, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
How does Category:Music infoboxes with unknown value for type get populated? I can't spot any mention of it in the template code. Is there another module that is doing the work? The reason I ask is that it appears to not be recognising "other" as a valid entry for type. - X201 ( talk) 13:58, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
I've been looking unsuccesfully into why on so many articles using {{
Infobox album}}
are ending up in the
Category:Music infoboxes with deprecated parameters. Originally I was just trying to fix the error on
The Room (film) but it looks like this issue is much bigger with over 150,000 articles in the deprecated parameters category. Did something break or am I missing some sort of easy fix? I'm just very confused at this point sadly.
Jeanjung212 (
talk) 18:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Artist
and artist
are different). An easy fix is to do a
subst, i.e. subst:Infobox album
. You just put this prefix there, then the template code cleans itself up automagically. (Auxiliary templates like {{
Extra chronology}} and {{
Singles}}, if present, may require the same treatment). Still a tedious work on that many articles, perhaps a bot should do this. —
Mike Novikoff 21:50, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I am wondering what an album that consists of home/cassette/etc. recordings as opposed to music recorded in a studio would be classed as, as it doesn't currently seem to be clear (and suggests the article on album types needs updating). FamblyCat94 ( talk) 01:23, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
I think there is a technical problem with this infobox, which doesn't exist in most other infoboxes. The page preview feature works like a "tool tip": when a reader hovers the mouse pointer over a wikilink, a box pops up with some of the linked article's lead text, and identifying image if there is one. The image is taken from the infobox if there is one, otherwise the top image is selected. This must default to disabled for logged-in users, and to enabled for IP users; that's how I found it by accident.
When I preview wikilinks to album pages, the lead text comes up but the cover photo in the infobox does not.
I wondered if this maybe is due to the pictures being fair-use, but I can prove that's not it: hover on this link to Superman, and you'll see the fair-use picture shows in the preview. So Template:infobox comics character doesn't have the problem.
If you're unfamiliar with this feature, it is enabled from your Preferences under the Appearance tab: set the radio button under Reading preferences: Page views. Notice the little note underneath it says "Certain gadgets and other customizations may affect the performance of this feature. If you experience problems please review your gadgets and user scripts, including global ones." I think that's what's going on here.
I don't know much about the technical details of template writing, or I would look into it myself. Can someone with such knowledge look into this and fix it? (If not, iss there another talk or help page I could post this question to? I haven't been able to find a WP page which explains the page preview option.) JustinTime55 ( talk) 19:34, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox album has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please fix problem: does not work properly with page preview feature: when reader hovers mouse pointer over a wikilink to an album page with this infobox, the album cover image does not show up in the preview window. (Example: Don't Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers: page preview shows lead text but no cover image.) This works properly for some infoboxes (e.g.: infobox comics character: Superman page preview works properly. JustinTime55 ( talk) 20:26, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
No, that burecratic bullshit doesn't cut it. I made the request as clear as I could by demonstrating the problem. I don't know what the technical solution to the problem is, so I can't possibly say "change X to Y". The request is to please solve the problem and kindly fix it.
I am a professional computer programmer; if one of my customers asked me to solve a software problem and I said, "I can't do that; please tell me what code to change", I'd be fired. JustinTime55 ( talk) 21:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
@ JustinTime55: It doesn't seem to be doing that now. In other words, works on my machine. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 06:28, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
In the template, the set up is made to include equal spacing, however, certain editors continue to remove the spacing, and make it one space between the "=" and the other media. For example — and I am going to use the Man of the Woods template for example — if we go by what the template calls, the infobox [should] look like this when editing:
{{Infobox album | name = Man of the Woods | type = studio | artist = [[Justin Timberlake]] | cover = Justin Timberlake - Man of the Woods (Official Album Cover).png | alt = Cover image features two images of a male, edited to appear as one. Top-half image features male in all-black suit and white undershirt, in a snow-covered wooded area. Bottom-half image features male in ripped blue jeans, flannel button down shirt in a smog-filled wooded area. Text is featured in handwritten print. | border = yes | released = {{Start date|2018|02|02|mf=yes}} | recorded = 2016–2017 | studio = {{hlist|[[Conway Recording Studios]], [[Los Angeles]]|[[EastWest Studios]], Los Angeles|[[Jungle City Studios]], [[New York City]]|[[Red Bull Music Academy|Red Bull Studios]], [[Sao Paulo]]}} | genre = {{hlist|[[Pop music|Pop]]|[[Electronic music|electronic]]|[[Contemporary R&B|R&B]]<ref name="genres"/>}} | length = {{duration|m=65|s=54}} | label = [[RCA Records|RCA]] | producer = {{hlist|Justin Timberlake (also [[Executive producer#Music|exec.]])|[[Danja (producer)|Danja]]|[[1500 or Nothin'|Larrance Dopson]]|[[Jerome "J-Roc" Harmon]]|[[Eric Hudson]]|Elliott Ives|[[Rob Knox (producer)|Rob Knox]]|[[The Neptunes]]|[[Timbaland]]}} | prev_title = [[The 20/20 Experience – 2 of 2]] | prev_year = 2013 | year = 2018 | next_title = | next_year = | misc = {{Singles | name = Man of the Woods | type = studio | single1 = [[Filthy (song)|Filthy]] | single1date = January 5, 2018 | single2 = [[Supplies (song)|Supplies]] | single2date = January 18, 2018 | single3 = [[Say Something (Justin Timberlake song)|Say Something]] | single3date = January 25, 2018 <!-- Sorry, but an album cover is not a [[Wikipedia:RS|reliable source]] that dictates when singles are coming out. Please find a [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]] third-party source to prove that "Man of the Woods" is the fourth single. --> }} }}
However, if users do the one space between, it would look like this — which I believe is a bit messy to look at and edit:
{{Infobox album | name = Man of the Woods | type = studio | artist = [[Justin Timberlake]] | cover = Justin Timberlake - Man of the Woods (Official Album Cover).png | border = yes | alt = The cover image features two images of a male, edited to appear as one. Top-diagonal-half image features male in all-black suit and white undershirt, in a snow-covered wooded area. Bottom-diagonal-half image features male in ripped blue jeans, flannel button down shirt in a smog-filled wooded area. Below this title: MAN OF THE WOODS, appears in capitalised handwritten print. | released = {{start date|2018|2|2}} | recorded = 2016–2017 | studio = {{hlist|[[Conway Recording Studios]], [[Los Angeles]]|[[EastWest Studios]], Los Angeles|[[Jungle City Studios]], [[New York City]]|[[Red Bull Music Academy|Red Bull Studios]], [[Sao Paulo]]}} | genre = {{hlist|[[Pop music|Pop]]|[[Contemporary R&B|R&B]]|[[Electronic music|electronic]]<ref name="genres"/>}} | length = {{duration|m=65|s=54}} | label = [[RCA Records|RCA]] | producer = {{hlist|Justin Timberlake (also [[Executive producer#Music|exec.]])|[[Danja (producer)|Danja]]|[[1500 or Nothin'|Larrance Dopson]]|[[Jerome "J-Roc" Harmon]]|[[Eric Hudson]]|Elliott Ives|[[Rob Knox (producer)|Rob Knox]]|[[The Neptunes]]|[[Timbaland]]}} | prev_title = [[The 20/20 Experience – 2 of 2]] | prev_year = 2013 | year = 2018 | next_title = | next_year = | misc = {{Singles | name = Man of the Woods | type = studio | single1 = [[Filthy (song)|Filthy]] | single1date = January 5, 2018 | single2 = [[Supplies (song)|Supplies]] | single2date = January 18, 2018 | single3 = [[Say Something (Justin Timberlake song)|Say Something]] | single3date = January 25, 2018 <!-- Sorry, but an album cover is not a [[Wikipedia:RS|reliable source]] that dictates when singles are coming out. Please find a [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]] third-party source to prove that "Man of the Woods" is the fourth single. --> }} }}
Which is the proper format to be used to end potential edit-warring once and for all? Also, I started up a discussion about {{ Start date}} here, which might also pertain to this page, as well. Hope we can put an edit to this. livelikemusic talk! 15:08, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
{{Infobox album | name = | type = | artist = | cover = | alt = | released = <!-- {{Start date|||}} --> | recorded = | venue = | studio = | genre = <!-- Do not add unsourced genres --> | length = | label = | producer = | prev_title = | prev_year = | next_title = | next_year = }}
— Ojorojo ( talk) 19:01, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
|alt=
aligns with the "d" in |released=
). —
Ojorojo (
talk) 21:43, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Ojorojo, are your settings set to use monospaced font in your edit window ("Edit area font style")? If they are and the characters in this sentence don't all have the same width, then you might have a font problem somewhere. If you aren't using monospaced font in the edit window, then the equals signs in the second example won't be aligned. Jc86035 ( talk) 07:59, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I just a version of this template to copy and paste. That's all I'm asking for. -- 80.3.85.48 ( talk) 17:50, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
This is the first I've noticed a change to infobox album. Which parameters have been deprecated? Why was any of it done? It looked better the old way. Changing something as extensive as the album template strikes me as a solution looking for a problem. A good editor knows when something should be left alone and when something should be changed. All of the people who have worked on infobox templates up until now, particularly IP users, are going to wonder what the standard is. For example, lowercase or uppercase for the field names, prev title instead of prev album.
Vmavanti (
talk) 01:51, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
There is a new magic word for short descriptions (used on mobile, apps, search...) which gets populated on enwiki through Template:Short description. More than 800,000 pages already have a short description, either directly or through some logic in an infobox template. This is e.g. implemented in Template:Infobox settlement without much problems (though improvements are always welcome!). The changes there [10] are relatively complicated, the local description we could generate here could be a lot simpler; "'type' album by 'artist'" (adding year would make it somewhat more complicated).
Anyone feels up to actually writing the code for this? Fram ( talk) 14:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello. In this infobox, I believe that the "caption" parameter should only be used if absolutely necessary; eg. to distinguish a specific version of an album cover that is shown in the infobox. However, I see a lot of album articles (particularly in Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronic Music, and related to the record label Monstercat) that have every cover with the caption "Cover art" ( example). I believe this is compeltely pointless, unnecessary, and that these captions that serve no purpose should be removed.
I have also crossposted this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronic music and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music. Thanks, Lazz _R 18:02, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Photographs and other graphics should have captions, unless they are unambiguous depictions of the subject of the article or when they are "self-captioning" images (such as reproductions of album or book covers).MOS:CAPTION — JJMC89 ( T· C) 23:40, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
There is an RFC on removing genres from infoboxes at WT:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Request for comment on removing genres from musician, album, and song infoboxes — BillHPike ( talk, contribs) 16:22, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I have run into issues with the substitution trick resulting in errors
like this where it states "String Module Error: Match not found" for the next album in a chronology. I am wondering what causes this? I have been running some sandbox tests and it occurs with non-existent pages (my initial hunch), but also with existing articles.
Does anyone have any knowledge as to the cause? Any help is greatly appreciated. (Also, feel free to play around with it in
my bot's sandbox if you like) --
TheSandDoctor
Talk 03:01, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
|next_year=
causes it. Extra punctucation, letters, etc., in some parameters will also cause an error (see
Category:Music infoboxes with Module:String errors). —
Ojorojo (
talk) 14:17, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
|released=Unreleased
is not recognized. It must contain a four number year, which is used in the chronology. It could be worked around using |misc=
{{
Extra chronology}}, but it doesn't seem that an unreleased album belongs in a chronology of released albums. —
Ojorojo (
talk) 15:54, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
I am in the process of clearing out Category:Music infoboxes with deprecated parameters and Category:Music infoboxes with Module:String errors. With backlogs of 149K and 7.1K articles respectively, it's impossible to do it in one go. I've made it down approximately to "Be", as you can see the only remaining pages from 0-Be are those which are in userspace, nominated for deletion or lack information to solve the Module:String error.
Since I started keeping track, the backlogs have been significantly reduced - the first category by around 8.7% (~13K articles), and the second category backlog by around 6.3% (~450 articles). I would gladly appreciate more help in tackling these issues, as the magnitude of articles in these categories is quite daunting. With the current template format it's much easier to avoid silly formatting errors and help ensure consistent usage. I have repaired a bunch more so that the templates are using non-deprecated parameters and the current simplified syntax. Generally any extra comments or weird formatting would trigger a Module:String error, i.e. unclosed italics, using the wrong bracket, having a template where a string is expected. Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:52, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
|studio=
and |venue=
. Albums seldom include both studio and live tracks. Maybe subst: could only produce studio, since it is the most common (subst: leaves out several other lesser used parameters, such as longtype, language, director, compiler, etc.) —
Ojorojo (
talk) 16:05, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Frietjes, Jon Kolbert, and TheSandDoctor: Sorry I didn't find this discussion until now. To briefly expand on X201's explanation, I for some reason built all of the replacement code on multiple nested layers of if parser functions and Module:String, and I do not want to touch it any more because it would be a fairly painful experience to wade through that code and figure out how to fix the imperfections. It was basically as good as I could have made it at the time.
The error on the blank Released field is probably intentional because I wanted to require a date for all three chronology fields before the error would go away. This is clearly not the best solution because it requires an editor to manually find all of the dates, but maybe in the next bot run the errors could simply be removed in a second edit, and a tracking category could be added for chronologies without all of the years filled in. Jc86035 ( talk) 21:32, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
This is just a not-very-useful note to say that this problem still exists. I haven't looked into the causes, but my diff may help develop a solution for what may be one of many pathological cases. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 18:53, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
''[[Genius of Modern Music: Volume 1]]''''<br />(1947)
. They're a pain to code for because there are so many possibilities, I'm doing a clean up of infoboxes at the moment too and have fallen foul of this a couple of times. Also, as a heads up, look out for any Frank Zappa albums, someone has gone through all of those and repurposed the field; adding a chronological discography number to the album name, this also breaks the template updating subst routine because it's unexpected content. I tend to sigh and look forward to the day when we've managed to plough though everything and albums and years are neatly in their own fields. -
X201 (
talk) 07:31, 8 October 2018 (UTC)<br />
that caused the error. -
X201 (
talk) 09:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
@ Frietjes: How should unreleased albums be handled? I've hit a problem with The Black Room (The KLF album). I get a string module error in the chronology because there is no release date for the album, obviously, being unreleased it's never going to have one. How can the template be fixed to handle this situation? Because this isn't a one off Category:Unreleased albums - X201 ( talk) 07:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
@ X201, Frietjes, and Jc86035: so just an update, I've gotten started on cleaning up the deprecations and I found something that definitely does appear to be broken... Category:Music infoboxes with Module:String errors is populated with tons of pages that don't appear to have any actual errors. Any chance one of you can take a look and see if you can figure out what is going wrong? Thanks in advance. -- Zackmann ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 18:45, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
@ Frietjes: So curious what you think of the way this template is currently laid out... I get the goal here was to be able to quickly subst the template and fix... but WOAH. Any chance you can work your magic? -- Zackmann ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 07:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)