This page 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. |
Should b-sides be categorized as singles? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 18:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Richhoncho:
There doesn't seem to much discussion here, even though I notified the music project. Does anybody have any objection if I change the guidelines to state clearly that "single equates to an A-side? @ Bossanoven:. I don't think you have come up yet with any reasonable justification for classifying b-sides as "singles." Is there anything else you wish to add? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 13:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Rich, the Beatles had a whole bunch of B-sides chart. Some of them might be double A-sides, that is something that I cannot distinguish with my sources. Now wouldn't it be weird to not categorize them as singles? - Bossanoven ( talk) 20:26, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Examples of B-sides charting? "I Saw Her Standing There", "You Can't Do That" by the Beatles, "Let's Spend the Night Together" by the Rolling Stones. - Bossanoven ( talk) 18:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Ojorojo: , Didn't disagree with anything you said, I was more concerned with how others might interpret. see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TyrusThomas4lyf. Now we need to agree the wording. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 22:30, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
This recent infobox merge [5] retains the Infobox standard's extra fields for original artist=, recordings= and performances=, in addition to the Infobox song's artist=. Add your comments at Template talk:Infobox song#Merge with Infobox standard. — Ojorojo ( talk) 20:47, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Please refer to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Taylor Swift#Angels Smile. Nahnah4 ( talk | contribs | guestbook) 09:08, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Should the WP:SONGCOVER guideline be loosened to include more sources?
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:
- the rendition is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song (not on the subject of the rendition),
- the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS.
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if it meets the standard inclusion policies of verifiability, neutral point of view and no original research.
- All information about the cover song must be attributed to a reliable source that mentions both the song and the artist
- The artist should be notable enough for a standalone article
- The due weight of the cover depends on its importance and level of coverage in reliable sources. A cover that achieves independent commercial success (eg: Joe Cocker's version of " With A Little Help From My Friends", Wet Wet Wet's cover of " Love Is All Around") should obtain more coverage than a single news report of performing the cover in concert.
The proposal would remove the requirement that the reliable source is discussing the song itself, rather than the cover version, and it would remove the requirement that the cover version be notable per NSONGS. Binksternet ( talk) 22:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I've recently had a discussion about this project guideline, and would like to propose a change to the following:
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if it meets the standard inclusion policies of verifiability, neutral point of view and no original research.
- All information about the cover song must be attributed to a reliable source that mentions both the song and the artist
- The artist should be notable enough for a standalone article
- The due weight of the cover depends on its importance and level of coverage in reliable sources. A cover that achieves independent commercial success (eg: Joe Cocker's version of " With A Little Help From My Friends", Wet Wet Wet's cover of " Love Is All Around") should obtain more coverage than a single news report of performing the cover in concert.
My view is this reflects what I see happening in numerous song GAs and DYKs, and so it accurately reflects what the community wants to do. Thoughts? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:
• the rendition is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song (not on the subject of the rendition),
• the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS.
WP:SONGCOVER (my suggested edit in strikethru)
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:
- the
renditioncover version is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song(not on the subject of the rendition),- the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS.
For lists of recordings by date, use an instance of {{{date}}}: for each entry; see WP:DATELIST.
WP:NSONG(my suggestions in bold)
Notability:
Songs and singles are probably notable if they have been the subject[1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. This excludes media reprints of press releases, or other publications where the artist, its record label, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the work.[3]
Song article creation:
Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability. If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created.
Notability aside, a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album.
The following factors suggest that a song or single may be notable, though a standalone article should still satisfy the aforementioned criteria.
- Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts.
- Has won one or more significant awards or honors, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award.
- Has been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands, or groups.
Songs with notable cover versions are normally covered in one common article about the song and the cover versions.
Articles about traditional songs should avoid original research and synthesis of published material that advances a position.
- Note: Songs that do not rise to notability for an independent article should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song.
- Note 2: Sources should always be added for any lore, history or passed-on secondary content. Wikiversity and Wikibooks have different policies and may be more appropriate venues for this type of content.
I think we should have a robust standard for how significant was the performance or the recorded cover version. If the cover version had a lasting impact that would be best. Whatever we decide, I hope very much that it will specifically address all the Chipmunk covers and all the Glee covers. That would help me figure out what to do with that person from near St Louis, Missouri, who spams Glee and Chipmunk covers throughout all the song articles, and has been doing it for a couple of years. [113] Sheesh. Binksternet ( talk) 21:18, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if it meets the standard inclusion policies of verifiability, neutral point of view and no original research. For cover-renditions, there are two cases to consider:
Case 1 (For brief mentions in cover song sections or lists of cover songs.)
- Information about the covering-rendition is attributed with at least one reference from a reliable source that:
- mentions or discusses details about the covered-song, the covering-rendition and the covering-artist or,
- demonstrates the covering-rendition was performed on a national television show or feature film or,
- demonstrates audio/visual play-count that exceeds 1,000,000 on a reputable online service or,
- demonstrates ranking on national or significant music or sales charts or,
- demonstrates a nomination or win of a notable award for the covering-rendition.
- For lists of recordings, or notable performances by date, use an instance of {{ Timeline-event}} for each entry; see WP:DATELIST.
Case 2 (For recorded covering-renditions that would otherwise qualify for a stand-alone article.)
- If the covering-rendition itself meets the requirements at WP:NSONGS, an appropriate Infobox ( {{ Infobox single}} or {{ Infobox song}}) may be added to the song article in release-date chronological order, and well sourced details about the covering-rendition may be merged into the body of the song-article.
In both cases, song-article content is subject to WP:DUE.
- Note 1. These guidelines apply to song-articles, other WikiProjects may have differing guidelines; for example, guidelines may differ for cover versions listed in film articles or television episode lists.
Hi, just wondering, how do you get the certified platinum/triple gold/etc categories to automatically generate? There's nothing on the main page. I must have created Category:Singles certified quadruple platinum by the Asociación Mexicana de Productores de Fonogramas y Videogramas at some point (probably noticed it as a red-linked category) because it was on my watch list and saw it was up for deletion. I checked the official site and there are five singles that meet this criteria: Adele's Rolling in the Deep, Ricky Martin's Gracias por Pensar en Mi, Pégate, Tu Recuerdo and Reik's Creo En Ti. The Ricky Martin ones don't have any automated categories but Rolling in the Deep does and it displays this one: Category:Singles certified an unknown number of platinum by the Asociación Mexicana de Productores de Fonogramas y Videogramas. I added the 4x category manually. Thanks for the help. —Мандичка YO 😜 02:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Akash Guhathakurta ( talk · contribs) has rapidly created a pile of pages on Indian songs, all AFAIK sourced to one web-site, http://atulsongaday.me/2013/03/18/keh-doon-tumhen-kyaa-chup-rahoon/ for example, and appears to be basically copying the lyrics from those sites. The website has a copyright notice, but I'm wondering if the site itself is a copy-vio too. At least one page Baghdad Ki Raaten, is a re-creation of a recently deleted page. Anyone who knows about this sort of thing should take a look. 220 of Borg 11:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Video vixen. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 65.94.43.89 ( talk) 09:27, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated Dixie (song) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:17, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Without you got 2x Platin in Denmark. See the Link: http://www.ifpi.dk/?q=content/david-guetta-feat-usher-without-you-emi-2 Joey929292 ( talk) 19:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums#Should song redirects be categorized? czar ⨹ 12:55, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Eres tú (Mocedades song)#Requested move 3 May 2015, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, Scolaire ( talk) 13:43, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
See here. Anyone who is interested may join this discussion. – Chase ( talk / contribs) 00:24, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Mean (song), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:57, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey guys, I'm one of the delegates at WP:FLC (aka one of the editors that promotes/doesn't promote Featured List nominations). Lately we've been noticing a problem at FLC, particularly with music-related nominations, and I thought I'd drop by just to give you all a heads-up about it. Basically what we've been seeing is nominations where shortly after the nomination begins several other music editors drop by to vote support without any comments beyond "good job" or the like. Perfectly fine, if there's no real issues with the list, but several times recently those initial "reviews" have been followed by 2-3 fairly substantive reviews by other editors that find some major issues with both the list itself (tables, etc.) and the prose. (not to pick on anyone, but example 1, example 2.) When that happens, it gives off the impression that the initial reviewers didn't, well, actually review the list. I really, really don't think it's anything so untoward as editors trying to create easy passes, or support trading- what I think is that some editors, even those with plenty of experience, just take a brief glance at the list, say "yup, looks good", and support.
The problem is, when we (the delegates) see supports without comments, followed by several intensive reviews that show big problems with the list? We basically have to throw out the initial supports as invalid. This wastes everyone's time, including the nominator's and the initial reviewers', and tends to really upset the nominator. It's just a bad time all around. This is not a problem that's limited to music lists, and not even a problem that's limited to FLC- there was a while, for example, when WP:VG nominations at FAC would get several quick-supports from well-meaning editors, but the only effect was to piss off the FAC delegates and hinder the nominations.
All I'm saying is, if you're reviewing a nomination at FLC (no matter the subject)? Please take at least 5-10 minutes and look through it closely for prose, grammar, logic, formatting, and referencing issues. Just supporting without reviewing a bit in-depth actually hurts more than it helps- it stalls the nominations, upsets the other reviewers and the nominator, and too much of it can sour editors on FLC/music lists/whatever. Thanks! -- Pres N 01:52, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for In the Pines to be moved to Where Did You Sleep Last Night. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 22:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Bangarang (song) to be moved to Bangarang. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I was just going through some of the entries in "Category:1971 songs" because the category had gotten added incorrectly to an article which is on my watchlist, and I wanted to see if there were other errors. I have a question: for songs in the era of recorded music, what year - or years - should a song be categorized in? The text at the top of the categories presently says "written or first produced in" a certain year. I was interpreting for a while as "written or first recorded", but, after looking at some articles, I now think that was a mistake, because when the song was actually recorded is frequently difficult to determine, and in some cases seems fairly unimportant (for instance, if the song was released years after the recording).
So, maybe the song should be categorized into one or more of the following: the year written (which could be assumed to be the year recorded, if known, unless known otherwise), the year first publicly performed (which again could be assumed to be the year written), and the year of release of the first recording. Or, we could simply list everything by first recording date only. Thoughts? (Sorry if this has come up before, I'm not a regular here.)
If we want to categorize by first commercial release date, that should be made clear in the text at the top of the song by year categories. Brianyoumans ( talk) 17:34, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I see where Brian is coming from and I don't disagree, however, I thought I'd just add some thinking matter to the discussion.
With those points in mind I think the year of song should be the first verifiable existence of the song which will primarily be the first appearance on an album, but not always. But where an earlier performance can be verified that should be the year of song. Basement Tape songs should be 1967 because they are contemporary with other '67 songs, rather than 1975 or 2014 songs.
Now comes the real problem, but that into a short understandable phrase we can all follow. Cheers. --
Richhoncho (
talk) 16:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Further Comment. The category says, Songs written or first produced in (year). This is a category that states when written or first became known. A recording release year, irrespective of the medium, is a commercial release, and relates to the record company, the artist (who may not be the creators of the song) and their products. The two things are different, to merge the two would be similar to merging chalk and cheese! -- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I fully support that the wording be changed, as suggested by Ojorojo, to
It captures the spirit of what the category is trying to achieve.-- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Victor Lopes: @ Iknow23: @ Rlendog: @ Ojorojo: @ Brianyoumans:. Firstly, Brian, a song which is a hit single in 1960 will still be categorized as a 1960 single irrespective of the year of song categorization. That said, does anybody have further objections to Ojorojo's suggested wording? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 11:25, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest. -- Lucas559 ( talk) 15:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
This discussion is relevant to WikiProject Songs, and interested editors may wish to comment. Chase ( talk | contributions) 00:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
There is an ongoing RFC discussion. Join in to comment to improve consensus. -- George Ho ( talk) 01:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
There is blanking of material going on at Yoga (Janelle Monáe song) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which I reverted. Perhaps one or more members from this WikiProject would be interested in seeing if some of the blanking is okay? Flyer22 ( talk) 23:58, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of God and Satan is under discussion, see talk:God and Satan (song) -- 67.70.32.20 ( talk) 06:47, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
What is the neewest standard of songs lists? Eurohunter ( talk) 11:31, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Can this page include songs produced by one or two of the trio, such as For Sure and That Sounds Good To Me? Spa-Franks ( talk) 11:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated List of songs recorded by Lana Del Rey for featured list status here. I'd appreciate it if any of you could take a look and leave your comments :) Littlecarmen ( talk) 19:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I've raised the question at the non-free content talk page regarding whether consensus exists to allow an exception to our prohibition against including the complete or extensive quotation of the lyrics of non-free songs in the case of national anthems. Guidance on this is currently somewhat contradictory. If you have an opinion on the matter, your feedback there would be welcome! -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:27, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Could we perhaps have some attention to Bell Bottom Blues (Derek and the Dominos song)? The songwriting is officially credited to Eric Clapton, but some editors are very keen on stating as a bald fact that the song was written by Clapton and Bobby Whitlock. This seems to be based on Whitlock claiming this to be the case, but it does not seem to have been confirmed by anyone else. Whitlock is quoted on the article talk page as claiming the issue was discussed when he was interviewed on Later With Jools Holland on the BBC, but the interview in question is available on YouTube and most of what he claims was said is not said. Without a more credible, impartial source all I'd be comfortable saying is that Whitlock claims to have co-written it. What does anybody else think? -- Nicknack009 ( talk) 21:33, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Pray to God is under discussion, see talk:Pray to God (song) -- 67.70.32.190 ( talk) 06:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Proposal regarding unusual prepositions in titles (re: clarification request in RM closure). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 20:49, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
The wiki music entry for "Inhaler" is specific to the song "inhaler", however there is also an artist named "inhaler" who has been releasing albums since 2002.
Having said, this, the Hooverphonic song "inhaler" is totally awesome! (so is most of "inhaler"s stuff too imo) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.41.175 ( talk) 06:11, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
RM discussion is ongoing; I invite you to join in for comments there. -- George Ho ( talk) 20:15, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I wish there was a rule about iTunes' remixed singles. Should we add the remix version of a single in the featured artist's discography's "Singles" section? I mean singles like "I'm Not the Only One" or "Pretend" have their official remix versions (with a new featured artist) which are aviable on iTunes for digital download. Would be nice if users, who edit music-related articles, write their opinions about this. -- Eurofan88 ( talk) 19:52, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello folks. I would like to ask feedback if the source http://www.music-news.com/shownews.asp?nItemID=81264 is reliable? Pretty much of the content is a transcription of an actual interview of the singer. Loads of information can be obtained from this article. I haven't done thorough checking if the same transcription existed elsewhere. Many thanks, -- Efe ( talk) 12:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
I've nominated the article about the song " R U Professional" for Featured Article consideration.
It's a satirical song and a form of parody music using sampling.
Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/R U Professional/archive1.
Thank you for your time,
— Cirt ( talk) 21:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Please feel free to comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians/Categorization#Songs by artist: genre categories that are mostly right but wrong for certain songs. Thank you. Binksternet ( talk) 18:34, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
For a while now I've been pondering the wisdom of having separate articles for these two. Obviously there is a lot of duplication between the two articles... there is little you can say about the band and its various incarnations without mentioning the song, its chart positions, etc. The version I have spent most time working on is the article for the song, rather than the article for the band – this version is better referenced and (I hope) better written than the article for Band Aid. Does anybody have any opinions as to whether we should keep both articles or merge them? Richard3120 ( talk) 17:16, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Some editors changed the layout from long-standing format to current mess. I need help on this. -- George Ho ( talk) 23:06, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
See Template talk:Infobox single#Proposed Deprecation Snuggums ( talk / edits) 21:01, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
This is a current FL candidate, see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga/archive1. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 21:42, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
A series of articles under this topic have been nominated at The Today's Article For Improvement project. What we do is organise collaborations between editors whereby each week we focus on bringing an article up to GA/FA. Please head over there and support (or oppose) the nominated articles.-- Coin945 ( talk) 08:43, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Could there be some guidance on how to format translations of lyrics? I reformatted the full version of Peat Bog Soldiers to a table (so that stanza's stay together to make comparisson between (german) original and translation is easier, but is this the right way to do this or are there even better ways? WillemienH ( talk) 07:32, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Proposal to rename, where appropriate, national music charts articles to territory and format rather than official name, so Swedish music charts rather than Sverigetopplistan, etc. Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Record Charts#National Albums/Music Charts. SilkTork ✔Tea time 10:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated Rich Girl (Gwen Stefani song) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:10, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
We're having trouble trying to find many details about this anthem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKYLSh7YvB8
There's a page for it I made here Hynm of Rîbnița and it was constantly attacked by other users, even threatened to be deleted even after I requested assistance with the article in the edit notes.
If anyone could help find much more information about this anthem, that would be wonderful. It would be more wonderful if this was palced under WikiProject Songs tag so people can help collaborate to find the sources and such.
Sereniama ( talk) 04:40, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
The article has a lot quotes. Paraphrasing is needed without being too close to quotes. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:20, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Both inside and outside Wikipedia there are plenty of search hits for "Michael Smotherman" and for "Micheal Smotherman". Are they the same person? If so, which spelling is correct? An image search throws up a couple of album covers (www.cdbaby.com/cd/smotherman, www dot amazon dot com/Micheal-Smotherman/dp/B003MXUHT6 [blacklisted link]) where the "Micheal" spelling is clear. -- John of Reading ( talk) 15:50, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Caminando is under discussion, see Talk:Caminando (Amaia Montero song) -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 05:56, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Having gone through your notability guidelines, I struggle to understand why the article for the song Keeping the Dream Alive by Freiheit was deleted. If it was just a novelty song which had disappeared into obscurity I would have understood, but Keeping the Dream Alive still receives airplay in the United Kingdom during Christmas (It was Christmas last week, I should know), and is often included on compilation albums. If your decision to redirect my article is based on chart positions, please remember that Driving Home for Christmas, another festive tune, only reached the top thirty, yet I don't see anyone making a fuss over that article; at least this song got to #14. Your guidelines also state that any potential entry must have been "... performed in a medium that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album". I can confirm that the song was often used during American Idol as a backdrop to console failed contestants, was performed on Idol Gives Back, and is on the Say Anything... soundtrack. It should also be noted that Kim Wilde covered the song on the deluxe edition of her 2015 album Wilde Winter Songbook. And I should also say that I was about to add more references before it was deleted. I think your decision less than an hour after posting was very unfair, condisering you didn't even "discus" it with other editors. Jemmabond ( talk) 13:59, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Bretonbanquet, really appreciate your comment. If the article is re-posted, I will definitely find more references. I also noticed a few typos, so that will be corrected, too. Thanks again. Jemmabond ( talk) 14:55, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Women in Music | |
---|---|
|
-- Ipigott ( talk) 10:46, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
A Request for comments regarding merging " Sugar Mama (Led Zeppelin song)" with " Sugar Mama (song)" has been added to Talk:Sugar Mama (song)#RfC: Should Sugar Mama (Led Zeppelin song) be merged with Sugar Mama (song)?. — Ojorojo ( talk) 18:35, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I've just completed (for the moment) a significant expansion of this article. A re-rate would be very much appreciated. 🖖 ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 08:36, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I have nominated Hollaback Girl for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I was just looking at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of classic rock songs and thought I'd post here. Do we have such lists? I don't even see a main article List of most popular songs? It must exist, right? You know, a sourced list of most popular songs maybe by year or decade or genre or country, etc... I think visitors would like to see Wikipedia cover this. Shouldn't there be a start to this? It would certainly turn into a zillion child articles. I'm sure this has been discussed to death. Sorry for not digging. I just woke up. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:12, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Did I mention I just woke up? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
But, hmmmm, I still see no List of most popular songs... Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
the topic of covers. I feel that a list of covers is an important factor in any song article. There is a lot of back and forth going on about what is considered a "notable" cover and that sort of thing. I am not comfortable learning that "This information can be already found on such-and-such a web site" because half (not a science1/2, an art 1/2) the information found on wikipedia can be found on other web sites. But those sites come and go and I believe that it is every editors hope that our editing here is eternal. So to speak. I think that every song article should have a potential List of covers of song title article attached to it. This information is serious information often looked for by more or less serious wikipedia users. Yes, such as myself. I presume that this topic has been discussed, perhaps many times in the past, if someone could direct me to those discussions I'd appreciate it. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 21:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
I plan on creating an article for a Korean single titled "교감 (Empathy)". However, there are a few issues are waiting for me in trying to name this article. First, let me describe the single: it is a collaboration between South Korean musicians Jung Yong-hwa and Sunwoo Jung-a. Released as "Empathy", the artists are credited in the order of 'Sunwoo Jung-a, Jung Yong-hwa', has its own cover, contains the song "불꽃놀이 (Fireworks)", and was released under MagicStrawberry Sound [116]. Also released as "Empathy", the artists are credited in the order of 'Jung Yong-hwa, Sunwoo Jung-a', has its own cover, contains the song "입김 (Hello)", and was released under FNC Entertainment [117]. Both were released concurrently on January 15, 2016.
...As you can probably imagine, this is fairly complicated. I can't name the article Empathy (song) because there is no song under that name. I can't name it Empathy (single) because it goes against naming conventions. I can't name it Empathy (EP) because these songs were released as separately, and as digital singles. I'm not sure if I can gather up information to make separate articles for each song, since a lot of the information is intermixed. What do I do? — ξ xplicit 02:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
So, implementing WP:IAR and using 'single(s)' would be merited in this case? I'm also actually wondering if I should use quotes or italics for the release. "Empathy" or Empathy? Generally, I've seen the former, like in 4 Times, but I'm not entirely sure which one is right since it's the name of a single and not necessarily a song. This is pretty confusing. — ξ xplicit 02:51, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Members may wish to comment at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)#Bias against notability of artists from early recordings. Best. 4meter4 ( talk) 15:58, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
This page 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. |
Should b-sides be categorized as singles? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 18:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Richhoncho:
There doesn't seem to much discussion here, even though I notified the music project. Does anybody have any objection if I change the guidelines to state clearly that "single equates to an A-side? @ Bossanoven:. I don't think you have come up yet with any reasonable justification for classifying b-sides as "singles." Is there anything else you wish to add? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 13:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Rich, the Beatles had a whole bunch of B-sides chart. Some of them might be double A-sides, that is something that I cannot distinguish with my sources. Now wouldn't it be weird to not categorize them as singles? - Bossanoven ( talk) 20:26, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Examples of B-sides charting? "I Saw Her Standing There", "You Can't Do That" by the Beatles, "Let's Spend the Night Together" by the Rolling Stones. - Bossanoven ( talk) 18:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Ojorojo: , Didn't disagree with anything you said, I was more concerned with how others might interpret. see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TyrusThomas4lyf. Now we need to agree the wording. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 22:30, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
This recent infobox merge [5] retains the Infobox standard's extra fields for original artist=, recordings= and performances=, in addition to the Infobox song's artist=. Add your comments at Template talk:Infobox song#Merge with Infobox standard. — Ojorojo ( talk) 20:47, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Please refer to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Taylor Swift#Angels Smile. Nahnah4 ( talk | contribs | guestbook) 09:08, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Should the WP:SONGCOVER guideline be loosened to include more sources?
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:
- the rendition is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song (not on the subject of the rendition),
- the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS.
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if it meets the standard inclusion policies of verifiability, neutral point of view and no original research.
- All information about the cover song must be attributed to a reliable source that mentions both the song and the artist
- The artist should be notable enough for a standalone article
- The due weight of the cover depends on its importance and level of coverage in reliable sources. A cover that achieves independent commercial success (eg: Joe Cocker's version of " With A Little Help From My Friends", Wet Wet Wet's cover of " Love Is All Around") should obtain more coverage than a single news report of performing the cover in concert.
The proposal would remove the requirement that the reliable source is discussing the song itself, rather than the cover version, and it would remove the requirement that the cover version be notable per NSONGS. Binksternet ( talk) 22:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I've recently had a discussion about this project guideline, and would like to propose a change to the following:
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if it meets the standard inclusion policies of verifiability, neutral point of view and no original research.
- All information about the cover song must be attributed to a reliable source that mentions both the song and the artist
- The artist should be notable enough for a standalone article
- The due weight of the cover depends on its importance and level of coverage in reliable sources. A cover that achieves independent commercial success (eg: Joe Cocker's version of " With A Little Help From My Friends", Wet Wet Wet's cover of " Love Is All Around") should obtain more coverage than a single news report of performing the cover in concert.
My view is this reflects what I see happening in numerous song GAs and DYKs, and so it accurately reflects what the community wants to do. Thoughts? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:
• the rendition is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song (not on the subject of the rendition),
• the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS.
WP:SONGCOVER (my suggested edit in strikethru)
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:
- the
renditioncover version is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song(not on the subject of the rendition),- the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS.
For lists of recordings by date, use an instance of {{{date}}}: for each entry; see WP:DATELIST.
WP:NSONG(my suggestions in bold)
Notability:
Songs and singles are probably notable if they have been the subject[1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. This excludes media reprints of press releases, or other publications where the artist, its record label, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the work.[3]
Song article creation:
Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability. If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created.
Notability aside, a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album.
The following factors suggest that a song or single may be notable, though a standalone article should still satisfy the aforementioned criteria.
- Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts.
- Has won one or more significant awards or honors, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award.
- Has been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands, or groups.
Songs with notable cover versions are normally covered in one common article about the song and the cover versions.
Articles about traditional songs should avoid original research and synthesis of published material that advances a position.
- Note: Songs that do not rise to notability for an independent article should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song.
- Note 2: Sources should always be added for any lore, history or passed-on secondary content. Wikiversity and Wikibooks have different policies and may be more appropriate venues for this type of content.
I think we should have a robust standard for how significant was the performance or the recorded cover version. If the cover version had a lasting impact that would be best. Whatever we decide, I hope very much that it will specifically address all the Chipmunk covers and all the Glee covers. That would help me figure out what to do with that person from near St Louis, Missouri, who spams Glee and Chipmunk covers throughout all the song articles, and has been doing it for a couple of years. [113] Sheesh. Binksternet ( talk) 21:18, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if it meets the standard inclusion policies of verifiability, neutral point of view and no original research. For cover-renditions, there are two cases to consider:
Case 1 (For brief mentions in cover song sections or lists of cover songs.)
- Information about the covering-rendition is attributed with at least one reference from a reliable source that:
- mentions or discusses details about the covered-song, the covering-rendition and the covering-artist or,
- demonstrates the covering-rendition was performed on a national television show or feature film or,
- demonstrates audio/visual play-count that exceeds 1,000,000 on a reputable online service or,
- demonstrates ranking on national or significant music or sales charts or,
- demonstrates a nomination or win of a notable award for the covering-rendition.
- For lists of recordings, or notable performances by date, use an instance of {{ Timeline-event}} for each entry; see WP:DATELIST.
Case 2 (For recorded covering-renditions that would otherwise qualify for a stand-alone article.)
- If the covering-rendition itself meets the requirements at WP:NSONGS, an appropriate Infobox ( {{ Infobox single}} or {{ Infobox song}}) may be added to the song article in release-date chronological order, and well sourced details about the covering-rendition may be merged into the body of the song-article.
In both cases, song-article content is subject to WP:DUE.
- Note 1. These guidelines apply to song-articles, other WikiProjects may have differing guidelines; for example, guidelines may differ for cover versions listed in film articles or television episode lists.
Hi, just wondering, how do you get the certified platinum/triple gold/etc categories to automatically generate? There's nothing on the main page. I must have created Category:Singles certified quadruple platinum by the Asociación Mexicana de Productores de Fonogramas y Videogramas at some point (probably noticed it as a red-linked category) because it was on my watch list and saw it was up for deletion. I checked the official site and there are five singles that meet this criteria: Adele's Rolling in the Deep, Ricky Martin's Gracias por Pensar en Mi, Pégate, Tu Recuerdo and Reik's Creo En Ti. The Ricky Martin ones don't have any automated categories but Rolling in the Deep does and it displays this one: Category:Singles certified an unknown number of platinum by the Asociación Mexicana de Productores de Fonogramas y Videogramas. I added the 4x category manually. Thanks for the help. —Мандичка YO 😜 02:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Akash Guhathakurta ( talk · contribs) has rapidly created a pile of pages on Indian songs, all AFAIK sourced to one web-site, http://atulsongaday.me/2013/03/18/keh-doon-tumhen-kyaa-chup-rahoon/ for example, and appears to be basically copying the lyrics from those sites. The website has a copyright notice, but I'm wondering if the site itself is a copy-vio too. At least one page Baghdad Ki Raaten, is a re-creation of a recently deleted page. Anyone who knows about this sort of thing should take a look. 220 of Borg 11:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Video vixen. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 65.94.43.89 ( talk) 09:27, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated Dixie (song) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:17, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Without you got 2x Platin in Denmark. See the Link: http://www.ifpi.dk/?q=content/david-guetta-feat-usher-without-you-emi-2 Joey929292 ( talk) 19:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums#Should song redirects be categorized? czar ⨹ 12:55, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Eres tú (Mocedades song)#Requested move 3 May 2015, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, Scolaire ( talk) 13:43, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
See here. Anyone who is interested may join this discussion. – Chase ( talk / contribs) 00:24, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Mean (song), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:57, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey guys, I'm one of the delegates at WP:FLC (aka one of the editors that promotes/doesn't promote Featured List nominations). Lately we've been noticing a problem at FLC, particularly with music-related nominations, and I thought I'd drop by just to give you all a heads-up about it. Basically what we've been seeing is nominations where shortly after the nomination begins several other music editors drop by to vote support without any comments beyond "good job" or the like. Perfectly fine, if there's no real issues with the list, but several times recently those initial "reviews" have been followed by 2-3 fairly substantive reviews by other editors that find some major issues with both the list itself (tables, etc.) and the prose. (not to pick on anyone, but example 1, example 2.) When that happens, it gives off the impression that the initial reviewers didn't, well, actually review the list. I really, really don't think it's anything so untoward as editors trying to create easy passes, or support trading- what I think is that some editors, even those with plenty of experience, just take a brief glance at the list, say "yup, looks good", and support.
The problem is, when we (the delegates) see supports without comments, followed by several intensive reviews that show big problems with the list? We basically have to throw out the initial supports as invalid. This wastes everyone's time, including the nominator's and the initial reviewers', and tends to really upset the nominator. It's just a bad time all around. This is not a problem that's limited to music lists, and not even a problem that's limited to FLC- there was a while, for example, when WP:VG nominations at FAC would get several quick-supports from well-meaning editors, but the only effect was to piss off the FAC delegates and hinder the nominations.
All I'm saying is, if you're reviewing a nomination at FLC (no matter the subject)? Please take at least 5-10 minutes and look through it closely for prose, grammar, logic, formatting, and referencing issues. Just supporting without reviewing a bit in-depth actually hurts more than it helps- it stalls the nominations, upsets the other reviewers and the nominator, and too much of it can sour editors on FLC/music lists/whatever. Thanks! -- Pres N 01:52, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for In the Pines to be moved to Where Did You Sleep Last Night. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 22:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Bangarang (song) to be moved to Bangarang. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I was just going through some of the entries in "Category:1971 songs" because the category had gotten added incorrectly to an article which is on my watchlist, and I wanted to see if there were other errors. I have a question: for songs in the era of recorded music, what year - or years - should a song be categorized in? The text at the top of the categories presently says "written or first produced in" a certain year. I was interpreting for a while as "written or first recorded", but, after looking at some articles, I now think that was a mistake, because when the song was actually recorded is frequently difficult to determine, and in some cases seems fairly unimportant (for instance, if the song was released years after the recording).
So, maybe the song should be categorized into one or more of the following: the year written (which could be assumed to be the year recorded, if known, unless known otherwise), the year first publicly performed (which again could be assumed to be the year written), and the year of release of the first recording. Or, we could simply list everything by first recording date only. Thoughts? (Sorry if this has come up before, I'm not a regular here.)
If we want to categorize by first commercial release date, that should be made clear in the text at the top of the song by year categories. Brianyoumans ( talk) 17:34, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I see where Brian is coming from and I don't disagree, however, I thought I'd just add some thinking matter to the discussion.
With those points in mind I think the year of song should be the first verifiable existence of the song which will primarily be the first appearance on an album, but not always. But where an earlier performance can be verified that should be the year of song. Basement Tape songs should be 1967 because they are contemporary with other '67 songs, rather than 1975 or 2014 songs.
Now comes the real problem, but that into a short understandable phrase we can all follow. Cheers. --
Richhoncho (
talk) 16:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Further Comment. The category says, Songs written or first produced in (year). This is a category that states when written or first became known. A recording release year, irrespective of the medium, is a commercial release, and relates to the record company, the artist (who may not be the creators of the song) and their products. The two things are different, to merge the two would be similar to merging chalk and cheese! -- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I fully support that the wording be changed, as suggested by Ojorojo, to
It captures the spirit of what the category is trying to achieve.-- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Victor Lopes: @ Iknow23: @ Rlendog: @ Ojorojo: @ Brianyoumans:. Firstly, Brian, a song which is a hit single in 1960 will still be categorized as a 1960 single irrespective of the year of song categorization. That said, does anybody have further objections to Ojorojo's suggested wording? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 11:25, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest. -- Lucas559 ( talk) 15:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
This discussion is relevant to WikiProject Songs, and interested editors may wish to comment. Chase ( talk | contributions) 00:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
There is an ongoing RFC discussion. Join in to comment to improve consensus. -- George Ho ( talk) 01:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
There is blanking of material going on at Yoga (Janelle Monáe song) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which I reverted. Perhaps one or more members from this WikiProject would be interested in seeing if some of the blanking is okay? Flyer22 ( talk) 23:58, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of God and Satan is under discussion, see talk:God and Satan (song) -- 67.70.32.20 ( talk) 06:47, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
What is the neewest standard of songs lists? Eurohunter ( talk) 11:31, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Can this page include songs produced by one or two of the trio, such as For Sure and That Sounds Good To Me? Spa-Franks ( talk) 11:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated List of songs recorded by Lana Del Rey for featured list status here. I'd appreciate it if any of you could take a look and leave your comments :) Littlecarmen ( talk) 19:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I've raised the question at the non-free content talk page regarding whether consensus exists to allow an exception to our prohibition against including the complete or extensive quotation of the lyrics of non-free songs in the case of national anthems. Guidance on this is currently somewhat contradictory. If you have an opinion on the matter, your feedback there would be welcome! -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:27, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Could we perhaps have some attention to Bell Bottom Blues (Derek and the Dominos song)? The songwriting is officially credited to Eric Clapton, but some editors are very keen on stating as a bald fact that the song was written by Clapton and Bobby Whitlock. This seems to be based on Whitlock claiming this to be the case, but it does not seem to have been confirmed by anyone else. Whitlock is quoted on the article talk page as claiming the issue was discussed when he was interviewed on Later With Jools Holland on the BBC, but the interview in question is available on YouTube and most of what he claims was said is not said. Without a more credible, impartial source all I'd be comfortable saying is that Whitlock claims to have co-written it. What does anybody else think? -- Nicknack009 ( talk) 21:33, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Pray to God is under discussion, see talk:Pray to God (song) -- 67.70.32.190 ( talk) 06:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Proposal regarding unusual prepositions in titles (re: clarification request in RM closure). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 20:49, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
The wiki music entry for "Inhaler" is specific to the song "inhaler", however there is also an artist named "inhaler" who has been releasing albums since 2002.
Having said, this, the Hooverphonic song "inhaler" is totally awesome! (so is most of "inhaler"s stuff too imo) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.41.175 ( talk) 06:11, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
RM discussion is ongoing; I invite you to join in for comments there. -- George Ho ( talk) 20:15, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I wish there was a rule about iTunes' remixed singles. Should we add the remix version of a single in the featured artist's discography's "Singles" section? I mean singles like "I'm Not the Only One" or "Pretend" have their official remix versions (with a new featured artist) which are aviable on iTunes for digital download. Would be nice if users, who edit music-related articles, write their opinions about this. -- Eurofan88 ( talk) 19:52, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello folks. I would like to ask feedback if the source http://www.music-news.com/shownews.asp?nItemID=81264 is reliable? Pretty much of the content is a transcription of an actual interview of the singer. Loads of information can be obtained from this article. I haven't done thorough checking if the same transcription existed elsewhere. Many thanks, -- Efe ( talk) 12:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
I've nominated the article about the song " R U Professional" for Featured Article consideration.
It's a satirical song and a form of parody music using sampling.
Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/R U Professional/archive1.
Thank you for your time,
— Cirt ( talk) 21:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Please feel free to comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians/Categorization#Songs by artist: genre categories that are mostly right but wrong for certain songs. Thank you. Binksternet ( talk) 18:34, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
For a while now I've been pondering the wisdom of having separate articles for these two. Obviously there is a lot of duplication between the two articles... there is little you can say about the band and its various incarnations without mentioning the song, its chart positions, etc. The version I have spent most time working on is the article for the song, rather than the article for the band – this version is better referenced and (I hope) better written than the article for Band Aid. Does anybody have any opinions as to whether we should keep both articles or merge them? Richard3120 ( talk) 17:16, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Some editors changed the layout from long-standing format to current mess. I need help on this. -- George Ho ( talk) 23:06, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
See Template talk:Infobox single#Proposed Deprecation Snuggums ( talk / edits) 21:01, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
This is a current FL candidate, see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga/archive1. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 21:42, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
A series of articles under this topic have been nominated at The Today's Article For Improvement project. What we do is organise collaborations between editors whereby each week we focus on bringing an article up to GA/FA. Please head over there and support (or oppose) the nominated articles.-- Coin945 ( talk) 08:43, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Could there be some guidance on how to format translations of lyrics? I reformatted the full version of Peat Bog Soldiers to a table (so that stanza's stay together to make comparisson between (german) original and translation is easier, but is this the right way to do this or are there even better ways? WillemienH ( talk) 07:32, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Proposal to rename, where appropriate, national music charts articles to territory and format rather than official name, so Swedish music charts rather than Sverigetopplistan, etc. Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Record Charts#National Albums/Music Charts. SilkTork ✔Tea time 10:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated Rich Girl (Gwen Stefani song) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:10, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
We're having trouble trying to find many details about this anthem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKYLSh7YvB8
There's a page for it I made here Hynm of Rîbnița and it was constantly attacked by other users, even threatened to be deleted even after I requested assistance with the article in the edit notes.
If anyone could help find much more information about this anthem, that would be wonderful. It would be more wonderful if this was palced under WikiProject Songs tag so people can help collaborate to find the sources and such.
Sereniama ( talk) 04:40, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
The article has a lot quotes. Paraphrasing is needed without being too close to quotes. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:20, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Both inside and outside Wikipedia there are plenty of search hits for "Michael Smotherman" and for "Micheal Smotherman". Are they the same person? If so, which spelling is correct? An image search throws up a couple of album covers (www.cdbaby.com/cd/smotherman, www dot amazon dot com/Micheal-Smotherman/dp/B003MXUHT6 [blacklisted link]) where the "Micheal" spelling is clear. -- John of Reading ( talk) 15:50, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Caminando is under discussion, see Talk:Caminando (Amaia Montero song) -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 05:56, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Having gone through your notability guidelines, I struggle to understand why the article for the song Keeping the Dream Alive by Freiheit was deleted. If it was just a novelty song which had disappeared into obscurity I would have understood, but Keeping the Dream Alive still receives airplay in the United Kingdom during Christmas (It was Christmas last week, I should know), and is often included on compilation albums. If your decision to redirect my article is based on chart positions, please remember that Driving Home for Christmas, another festive tune, only reached the top thirty, yet I don't see anyone making a fuss over that article; at least this song got to #14. Your guidelines also state that any potential entry must have been "... performed in a medium that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album". I can confirm that the song was often used during American Idol as a backdrop to console failed contestants, was performed on Idol Gives Back, and is on the Say Anything... soundtrack. It should also be noted that Kim Wilde covered the song on the deluxe edition of her 2015 album Wilde Winter Songbook. And I should also say that I was about to add more references before it was deleted. I think your decision less than an hour after posting was very unfair, condisering you didn't even "discus" it with other editors. Jemmabond ( talk) 13:59, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Bretonbanquet, really appreciate your comment. If the article is re-posted, I will definitely find more references. I also noticed a few typos, so that will be corrected, too. Thanks again. Jemmabond ( talk) 14:55, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Women in Music | |
---|---|
|
-- Ipigott ( talk) 10:46, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
A Request for comments regarding merging " Sugar Mama (Led Zeppelin song)" with " Sugar Mama (song)" has been added to Talk:Sugar Mama (song)#RfC: Should Sugar Mama (Led Zeppelin song) be merged with Sugar Mama (song)?. — Ojorojo ( talk) 18:35, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I've just completed (for the moment) a significant expansion of this article. A re-rate would be very much appreciated. 🖖 ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 08:36, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I have nominated Hollaback Girl for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I was just looking at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of classic rock songs and thought I'd post here. Do we have such lists? I don't even see a main article List of most popular songs? It must exist, right? You know, a sourced list of most popular songs maybe by year or decade or genre or country, etc... I think visitors would like to see Wikipedia cover this. Shouldn't there be a start to this? It would certainly turn into a zillion child articles. I'm sure this has been discussed to death. Sorry for not digging. I just woke up. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:12, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Did I mention I just woke up? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
But, hmmmm, I still see no List of most popular songs... Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
the topic of covers. I feel that a list of covers is an important factor in any song article. There is a lot of back and forth going on about what is considered a "notable" cover and that sort of thing. I am not comfortable learning that "This information can be already found on such-and-such a web site" because half (not a science1/2, an art 1/2) the information found on wikipedia can be found on other web sites. But those sites come and go and I believe that it is every editors hope that our editing here is eternal. So to speak. I think that every song article should have a potential List of covers of song title article attached to it. This information is serious information often looked for by more or less serious wikipedia users. Yes, such as myself. I presume that this topic has been discussed, perhaps many times in the past, if someone could direct me to those discussions I'd appreciate it. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 21:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
I plan on creating an article for a Korean single titled "교감 (Empathy)". However, there are a few issues are waiting for me in trying to name this article. First, let me describe the single: it is a collaboration between South Korean musicians Jung Yong-hwa and Sunwoo Jung-a. Released as "Empathy", the artists are credited in the order of 'Sunwoo Jung-a, Jung Yong-hwa', has its own cover, contains the song "불꽃놀이 (Fireworks)", and was released under MagicStrawberry Sound [116]. Also released as "Empathy", the artists are credited in the order of 'Jung Yong-hwa, Sunwoo Jung-a', has its own cover, contains the song "입김 (Hello)", and was released under FNC Entertainment [117]. Both were released concurrently on January 15, 2016.
...As you can probably imagine, this is fairly complicated. I can't name the article Empathy (song) because there is no song under that name. I can't name it Empathy (single) because it goes against naming conventions. I can't name it Empathy (EP) because these songs were released as separately, and as digital singles. I'm not sure if I can gather up information to make separate articles for each song, since a lot of the information is intermixed. What do I do? — ξ xplicit 02:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
So, implementing WP:IAR and using 'single(s)' would be merited in this case? I'm also actually wondering if I should use quotes or italics for the release. "Empathy" or Empathy? Generally, I've seen the former, like in 4 Times, but I'm not entirely sure which one is right since it's the name of a single and not necessarily a song. This is pretty confusing. — ξ xplicit 02:51, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Members may wish to comment at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)#Bias against notability of artists from early recordings. Best. 4meter4 ( talk) 15:58, 26 January 2016 (UTC)