Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music standards

• Wikipedia talk:Music standards archive 1
• old talk from village pump: Talk:Oops I Did It Again

---

I have a question I think we should decide on. Some lists of bands are organized by the performers last name, and this is often fine and dandy. However, it gets sticky with Bobby Fuller Four and Brian Setzer Orchestra (where it just looks weird) and the downright confusing issue of whether Alice Cooper and Marilyn Manson are a person or a band. The answer, of course, is both, though not necessarily at the same time. A lot of music sites put artists by their first name always (allmusic, vh1, some others) -- it could be for this reason, or because they use computers that don't know the difference when they alphabetize. What do others think? Tokerboy

<snipped some finished discussions and moved to archive>

I disagree with Goatasaur's assertion that a-ha and k.d. lang should be capitalized against their will, except maybe at the beginning of a sentence for clarity's sake. Of course, the title of the article has to begin with an uppercase letter, but I don't see any reason to do it in the body of articles. Tokerboy

There is prose stuff at 1983 in music, 1991 in music, 1992 in music, 1979 in music and 1977 in music.

It would be nice if we had a list of bands that do not take the. Since I'm not sure, I'll list the ones I don't think take the article as part of the name here in talk for now:

• Googling is inconclusive: Bobby Fuller Four, Brides of Funkenstein[?], Dave Clark Five, Electric Prunes, Lovin' Spoonful, New York Dolls, Sex Pistols, Verve Pipe[?], Youngbloods
• Googling indicated there is a the: The Fabulous Thunderbirds, The Get-Up Kids, The Jesus & Mary Chain, The New Amsterdams[?], The Smashing Pumpkins

I don't know if there is any way to truly confirm any of these, except maybe by e-mailing their record company or agent to see what's on the actual contract. Tuf-Kat

I don't think there's any need to list bands that do take the article on the policy page, as the list would be much too long. Bands that don't take the article are the exception, so they should be listed. Maybe a list of ones that seem like they don't take it but really do, like the Smashing Pumpkins, whom I could have sworn did not take the article (maybe that's just me). Tuf-Kat

Since no one complained, I removed that list.

Can anyone name a genre that is always capitalized? People seem to like doing that, so I'd like to add a little somethin-somethin to the standards listing the genres that are capitalized. The only one I can think of is New Wave (and, I suppose, No Wave), and the place-names in Chicago blues or Memphis soul -- I think there are more that are always capitalized, but can't think of them. Tuf-Kat

---

Question about the following:

Don't use piped links to the "year in music" articles (i.e. do not write "the Beatles released Please Please Me in 1963"). Instead, link to the normal year article (1963) and, sparingly use parentheses after years mentioned in the article, such as "the Beatles released Please Please Me in 1963 (see 1963 in music)".

Why is this rule here? For most music articles, it seems far more relevent to link to the *_in_music page than to the year itself. - RobLa 17:32 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

heh...answered my own question. I missed the link to the Wikipedia talk:Music standards archive 1. I'm leaving this on the page because I think this will be an FAQ - RobLa 17:42 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

---

Please see Wikipedia talk:Timeline standards for a discussion of a "Proposal for new header". This proposal makes it less of an issue to link to 1977 instead of linking to [ 1977 in music|1977 ], since in either case, it's easy to get to the 1977 in music page. -- RobLa 06:16 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)

---

Does anybody know where to find chart positions for UK, Australia, Jamaica, etc? Tuf-Kat

Here's a whole buncha charts: [1] (http://www.lanet.lv/misc/charts/)

And more [2] (http://members.lycos.co.uk/vocalist/music_charts)

Neither of these are very useful. Does anybody know who does the official charts, as much as there is one, and/or know of a site that includes archives? Tuf-Kat

---

Unless anybody complains, I will add something about soundtrack titling. They should be at Saturday Night Fever (soundtrack). There's only maybe a half-dozen soundtracks that deserve an article IMHO, but I'll add it to the list of standards unless there are qualms. Tuf-Kat

---

Track Listings

There was some suggestion that track listings were going to be done with MusicBrainz or some other listings site - did that get anywhere? Thinking here of Michael's contributions... Martin

---

Talk on standardising Grammy pages moved to Talk:Grammy

sannse 20:40 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)

---

As I've mentioned in several places, I'd like to eliminate "similar artists" and such lists. My basic reasoning is that it's inherently POV unless you give a reason, an actual similarity, which would work better in a prose format. See Talk:Fiona Apple also. If no one complains, I will add it here. Tuf-Kat 03:58 Apr 12, 2003 (UTC)

Added to the main page. Tuf-Kat

---

Hmmm, interesting... judging from the list, it appears alternative hip hop groups rarely use the the. Strange... Tuf-Kat

---

I have come up with a format I like for a list of definitive albums (see Talk: Emo[?] for background). I have made articles currently at User:TUF-KAT/List of hip hop albums and User:TUF-KAT/List of grunge music albums and will soon move them to the article namespace if no one complains. I chose these because there is one small genre and one broad supergenre, and I think the current format works well, even though the hip hop list is superlarge in memory (do external links take lots of space?). Tuf-Kat

114 kilobytes! I suppose you could move the external links to the individual album pages. Would that work? It would make the pages cleaner looking as well. But on the down side, it would be splitting up useful information and possibly it would encourage the addition of albums without any justification. Either way, the lists are impressive and look like a very useful addition. -- sannse 11:54 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

The best solution I had thought of to that would be to make the default page List of hip hop albums, exclusive, which might have the top twenty most-cited albums listed (plus maybe some others, like top ten most-cited albums by a woman, top ten best-selling of all time, so on) and a link to List of hip hop albums, inclusive, which would include all the links and the nitty-gritty. I decided not to do that because if people added more links to the inclusive page, the other would have to be updated as the most-cited albums change and that seemed like it might get complicated. On third thought, now, that seems like a good idea again... Tuf-Kat

They look good. A nice piece of work -- sannse 15:55 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

---

What should we do with regards to foreign song title translations? Also how should we deal with series theme songs? Here was my take Wikipedia:Theme Song Format. -- Emperorbma 23:45 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)