Talk:Kylie Minogue singles discography

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former FLCKylie Minogue singles discography is a former featured list candidate. Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 3, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
March 14, 2011Featured list candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured list candidate

Orphaned references in Kylie Minogue singles discography[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Kylie Minogue singles discography's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "bpi":

  • From Kylie (album): "British sales certificate for 'Kylie'". British Phonographic Industry. Retrieved 1 October 2007.
  • From Showgirl: The Homecoming Tour: "British sales certificate for Showgirl Homecoming Live". British Phonographic Industry. 16 February 2007. Retrieved 7 January 2008.
  • From Showgirl Homecoming Live: "British sales certificate for Showgirl Homecoming Live". British Phonographic Industry. February 16, 2007. Retrieved January 7, 2008.
  • From Kylie Minogue albums discography: "BPI - Certified Awards Search". British Phonographic Industry. Retrieved 2009-08-27.
  • From Enjoy Yourself (Kylie Minogue album): "British sales certificate for Enjoy Yourself". British Phonographic Industry. 1 January 1990. Retrieved 3 December 2007.

Reference named "RIAA":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:45, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Old page history[edit]

See Talk:Kylie Minogue singles discography/old for the history of the old version of this article. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge the Guest appearances section of Kylie Minogue albums discography into the Kylie Minogue singles discography article. I Help, When I Can. [12] 21:15, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I submitted a request to Merge the Guest appearances section of Kylie Minogue albums discography into the Kylie Minogue singles discography article. That section of the article is about songs, singles or not. Some of them are singles and they repeat information within this article. I want to merge the sections and eliminate repeating information. I Help, When I Can. [12] 22:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per the layout of similar discographies and simply because guest appearances are not albums. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 23:40, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the fact that guest appearances are on singles not albums -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 17:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cprice and Lil-unique. Novice7 | Talk 04:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.

To other editors[edit]

Due to this article being of top importance to the Kylie Minogue WikiProject and this list's contents affecting more than 60 articles in the project, a lot of manners to deal with it are usually discussed at the project's talk page. If you are looking for explanations and conversations a regular talk page should have, they can be found there. Thank you. I Help, When I Can. [12] 01:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the US (dance) chart positions?[edit]

before splitting and seperating the single from the album discography, they were listed! kylie topped three times the recent us dance charts with the singles all the lovers, get ouuta my way and better than today. it's a bit sad, that this is not shown anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keine melodien (talk • contribs) 09:37, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree!! And now 'put your hands up' is #2 on the dance charts in the USA. Why has her US positions been removed (even her Hot 100 positions are gone). She's made a much more concerted effort to market in America so why delete her positions NOW of all times??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.149.171.109 (talk) 04:28, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Switching Norway with United States[edit]

Well, because of the notability of her charting endeavors in the United States and her lack of placings in Norway, I am suggesting that the US replace Norway's spot. Alphabetically, it would be after UK, but you get the idea... Thoughts? I Help, When I Can. [12] 00:45, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I support this change. I hope this applies for the three singles tables? Also, US Dance or Hot 100? Novice7 (talk) 15:55, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it applies to all four. I am planning to use Hot 100 as a primary and Dance as a secondary in footnotes. Madonna's does this and in WP:CHARTS, it has multiple eligible Billboard charts. I Help, When I Can. [12] 23:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why replace? Why not just include her US Billboard charts as well?Ordinary Person (talk) 11:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Find it very surprising that the US charts are for the most part omitted. Begs the question if they were not included because she hasn't had many on it. 76.95.33.253 (talk) 01:39, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Changes[edit]

So i recently gave both articles an overhaul, including the addition of a "JPN" (Japan) and "US" column in place of "NZ" (New Zealand) and "SWE" (Sweden) in the albums discography. However, those changes were reverted as they had to be discuseed. So here is what I propose for this article:

  • The removal of the "SWE" (Sweden) column, instead replacing them with the far more significant "US" column. The "US" column is used in every discography page when possible, and is far more notable than the Sweden column, which I have noticed is very rarely used in most discography pages. Since only 2 of Kylie's singles have ever charted in Japan, I believe the "NZ" column should stay, but the "SWE" column will be replaced. Here would be the source for the US: http://www.allmusic.com/artist/kylie-minogue-p4921/charts-awards
  • The removal of "infodisc.fr" as a source for French chart info. I have not found a single other discography page that uses this as a source, and the chart info on there completely contradicts with the official "lescharts.com" website. If you check both websites, you will find that the "infodisk.fr" site does not share the same chart peak info as the official "lescharts.com" website.

I believe these changes would strongly benefit the article, which I believe is not up to standard at all. Please reply and tell me which changes you believe should and should not occur. Thank you.--Meluvseveryone (talk) 02:53, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Dance Chart VS Sales charts[edit]

I believe that the Italy chart in Kylie's 2012 chart in her singles discography should be replaced with a U.S. Dance Chart because it has been Kylie's most successful chart of this new decade. As simple as that.Gay4RKO (talk) 19:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Regardless of how high the peaks are, the U.S. Dance chart does not in any way reflect the sales of the singles in the U.S. market; therefore, should be left out as far as there are positions available for sales charts. In this case Italy's No.6 position for "All the Lovers" is worth more than all the peaks U.S. Dance Chart has to offer which is simply based on what DJs sumbit.--Harout72 (talk) 22:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

US charts on feats[edit]

The reason the 1990s and 2010s tables do not include listings for US Billboard chart positions is that Kylie Minogue did not have any tracks in the US Billboard Singles charts in the 1990s or 2010s (according to the Billboard website).

Some of her "feats" charted in the US, however, so I'll add that column.Ordinary Person (talk) 14:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When inserting positions, please make sure that the source(s) provided do support those positions, so editors can verify them. In this edit, you have inserted No.13 for "Do They Know It's Christmas?" which the source provided does not support. In fact, that song doesn't seem to have positions available whatsoever. Where are you getting it?--Harout72 (talk) 15:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Singles or not?[edit]

There seems to be some confusion recently regarding the tracks 'Lhuna' and 'Whistle' and whether they should be included in the list of official singles. In my opinion, whilst they were commercially available, I don't feel they belong in the official singles section. I've always considered 'Lhuna' as a Coldplay track in which Kylie features, due to it being recorded during the Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends sessions, therefore believe this should appear in the "Featured Singles" section. I was personally quite happy with 'Whistle' included in the "Other Appearances" section, although it wouldn't bother me too greatly if it remained in the "Singles". I think it's important to resolve this to prevent any "editing wars".

Skirt[edit]

The souces all say "brandnew single" - so why it's not listed as regular single? --95.222.173.70 (talk) 02:42, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Kylie Minogue singles discography[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Kylie Minogue singles discography's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "ARIA":

Reference named "MC":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 06:38, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Kylie Minogue singles discography[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Kylie Minogue singles discography's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "allmusic":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:00, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kylie Minogue singles discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:16, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues[edit]

I'm going to go through this article while I have the free time and tagging a few issues I noticed in the article. When I have the time, I plan on fixing them, but I will tag them to allow any brave editors to take these issues on themselves. Happy editing! I helpdןǝɥ I 12:13, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Especially For You", "Higher" and "Kids"[edit]

"Especially for You" and "Kids" are two singles that feature Kylie and have also been included on releases of her albums. However, they are not proper singles released to promote the albums they were featured on. Therefore, they belong in the "As featured artist" section of this list.

"Especially for You" was a duet with Jason Donovan released at the end of 1988 (http://www.allmusic.com/album/release/especiallyforyou-mr0004633411 ← citation for release date; http://www.webcitation.org/6nx5ReouK ← citation proving the initial chart run on the UK Singles Chart) most likely for Donovan's upcoming debut album Ten Good Reasons (released 2 May, 1989 ← http://www.allmusic.com/album/release/ten-good-reasons-mr0004633410). This song was also included on the North American version of Kylie's second album, Enjoy Yourself, in 1990 (http://www.allmusic.com/album/release/enjoy-yourself-mr0000265493). This inclusion happened a full year, two months, and two days after the initial release of the single. In fact, a few sources explicitly refer to "Hand on Your Heart" (released 1989) as the lead single from this album, directly conflicting the current information in this article. Other sources even directly go out of their way not to list the song as a single from this album. (Proof: http://www.webcitation.org/6nx4tksQ0 ← Official Charts Company - "Hand On Your Heart was the lead single from Kylie’s second album Enjoy Yourself...", http://www.webcitation.org/6nx5WyhwK ← "Especially for You" is purposefully left out when listing singles from the album, yet included in detail in the preceding paragraph before, See: "Enjoying Kylie: The Minogue Catalog" by Michael Paoletta in the 16 February 2002 edition of Billboard ← Similar treatment in this 2002 edition of Billboard).

Because of these findings and the inactivity on this article in general, I will move "Especially for You" to the "As featured artist" section of this list immediately. If there is consensus towards the opposite opinion, I will respect it, however.

I was going to do "Kids" right after this, but writing all this up with citations took around 45 minutes, so I'll write about why Kids should be moved later. Thanks if you got this far into reading! I helpdןǝɥ I 13:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to also move "Higher" back to the "As featured artist" section of the list, considering it wasn't even released by the same label that released Aphrodite, the album this article is claiming it is a single of. The song itself was only included on a special edition version of the album released in 2011, a significant time after the initial single release. I helpdןǝɥ I 14:18, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I should add on that in most of these cases that I've investigated so far, there are multiple reputable sources that vouch for these songs being singles for the featured artist's album and not Kylie's. I helpdןǝɥ I 14:41, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@IHelpWhenICan: Isn't this based on whether it is credited with an "and"? i.e. "Robbie Williams and Kylie Minogue"? For example, both Camila Cabello singles. TheKaphox T 15:51, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@TheKaphox: What about everything else I said? (That sounds confrontational, but I don't mean it that way.) I helpdןǝɥ I 15:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@IHelpWhenICan: It's fine. I just thought that the only thing that mattered is how it was credited by the artists themselves, is it not? I'd like some more opinions regarding this, though. TheKaphox T 15:58, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@TheKaphox: I mean, alternating between "featuring" and "and" seems to be a common occurrence in the music industry that doesn't necessarily mean anything more than the other. If anything, it might refer to how lines/lyrics/time is distributed in a song. Another practice is an artist doing a song with another artist, one of these artists including it on their album and releasing it as a single, and the other artist tagging it on an album as either and afterthought because of it's success, or other various reasons. Just because this happens, it doesn't automatically mean that the song is a single for both artists, and there are various indicators when this has taken place. As I do research, I am finding the "Kids" situation more sticky than the others, and my findings may conclude that it is indeed a full-fledged single of hers, but the other cases obviously aren't. I'm going to do some MOS snooping to see if there is any official verdict, and I of couse welcome opinions on this issue. I helpdןǝɥ I 16:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@TheKaphox:Ok, I can see your side of the coin now. I went to WP:DISCOGS and sifted through a lot of FL discogs. Very few articles of the ones I looked at had this situation because the people were credited using the word "featuring" but a couple did. In some, I'd argue the majority, how the artists were billed was the key defining difference. In 2 (Mariah Carey singles discography, Fantasia Barrino discography) the difference was whose single it actually was. Basically we need to figure out which determining mechanism is the most accurate, fair, and easy. As my brain mulls on it, I think it would be fine to add songs where Kylie is credited on the same level billing back to the main section as long as we pay attention to which album the single is promoting, no? Sorry for being so long winded. I helpdןǝɥ I 17:12, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is an entirely pointless discussion; you've done a complete 180 on the issue. A single does not have to originally feature on one of Minogue's albums to be a release she's equally credited on, so if the issue is that it wasn't originally released in promotion of the album of hers it was later included on, then change the album column to show the original release by the other artist it was released in promotion of. This is discography standard on Wikipedia. The article for "Especially for You"—and this article, up until you decided to object—recognised that it is credited as "Kylie and Jason". How the label chooses to credit the artists is not arbitrary; it's quite carefully chosen. "Higher" does not equally credit Kylie; the cover art says "Taio Cruz featuring Kylie", and it was released on Rokstarr and nothing of hers. "Limpido" appears to give equal credit to Kylie, however. The only time an artist is credited as "with" and put in another section is when that section is a "collaborative singles" section, which is quite rare. Ss112 17:47, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ss112:I just want to start off saying that I think you finding this discussion "entirely pointless" is quite rude. That aside, there is no explicit "discography standard" on Wikipedia. That is the reason I brought this up. To make up my mind I didn't use the information from the articles verbatim because they're quite messy. I looked for citations and information on the song to form my opinion. After Kaphox's message, I decided to go through FL's with the WP:DISCOGS and see if there was a correlation or precedent to follow in this matter, hence my opinion change. I brought "Higher" into this conversation because before I moved it it was in the regular singles section, making my notice reasonable. I just wanted to hear other opinions on this matter, if people cared, and reach a solid consensus. I helpdןǝɥ I 18:01, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What actually should've required consensus is your original change. You don't change a page then require consensus to change it back to the way it originally was (and stood for years, during which many editors changed the page and did not have an issue with it). TheKaphox should have reverted to begin with then you should've discussed per WP:BRD. I only said it's pointless now because you've realised you were wrong. If nobody has any objections, it should be restored to the way it was before you required consensus to reinstate placing "Especially for You" in the main singles section. And yes, there is a discography standard—an unofficial one by music editors who know the difference between "and" and "featuring". I would take official cover art sanctioned by a label over how a third-party source decides to credit artists and in what order any day. Ss112 18:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ss112: As my earlier message stated "Because of these findings and the inactivity on this article in general, I will move "Especially for You" to the "As featured artist" section of this list immediately. If there is consensus towards the opposite opinion, I will respect it, however." That is the reason why I went ahead and made the bold changes without consensus, yet gave my full reasoning behind them on the talk page. I helpdןǝɥ I 18:23, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying every single change to a page requires consensus, and nor do I think because a page is inactive that means people won't care about changes made to it; it might mean they feel there's nothing more that can be done to improve it, hence why it isn't very active. Discussions should not be around whether to reinstate the original version of a page; it should be around whether to keep (proposed) changes. You're really not going to get dozens of editors here saying how they feel about you moving a song Kylie is clearly equally credited on to a section clearly marked "as featured artist", so you hoping for consensus to prove you wrong or now confirm your changed mind is a bit of a reach. She's quite obviously not featured on it. She's credited as "and" everywhere I can find, and in most places before Jason. I suggest an editor move it back now and then the discussion switch to "are these collaborations 'and' or 'featuring'? What should be moved?" (If you all really want to do that.) Now please stop tagging me back here because I have nothing left to say. Ss112 18:31, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Well, I could have waited around for no one's response, and make the change from the afterlife, or be bold. I chose the latter and I am very proud of my decision. Still, thank you for contributing your opinion to this discussion, even if it was condescending. I helpdןǝɥ I 18:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you want to disregard what I just said, I will respond back here. There was no need for that silly and sarcastic reply, and personally, I'd find it hard to be proud of something you're now freely admitting you were wrong about. If you admit you're not going to get consensus for anything here and are now admitting you were wrong, I'm going to revert your original change and restore the page the way it was, then the discussion can be over whether the singles actually are or aren't "and" or "featuring". Reverting me then will constitute an edit war, because your changes should have been the subject of the discussion. Ss112 18:43, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ss112: I gave you a taste of your own medicine as far as I am concerned. Do as you wish. I helpdןǝɥ I 18:53, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Kylie Minogue singles discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Kylie Minogue singles discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:43, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kylie - Dancing[edit]

Kylies new single is written by Kylie, Steve McEwan and Nathan Chapman, not amy Wadge and Sky Adams as is presently being reported. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:71D0:F5F0:F15F:4D1F:4200:E3B6 (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accurate source needed for Kylie Minogue record sales.[edit]

One of the two sources identified provides no number, and does not appear to be a strong source.

The second source states: "The singing siblings who have sold more than 80 million records between them"

This statistic is also quoted on the Kylie Minogue page. This weak evidence is likely why Kylie Minogue does not appear in the Wikipedia list of top selling musicians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.92.90.139 (talk) 22:45, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Belgium and Netherlands[edit]

Can we not include the single chart peak positions in Belgium and Netherlands, instead of Us Dance? Looking at Minogue's chart success into those 2 countries, she has more chart entries from the 1980s up to the 2020s than Us Dance. So why is US Dance getting more recognition in this article? Her Billboard Hot 100 chart positions are already in the article anyway. Why does the US charts need to have two columns in this singles discography article?TheHotwiki (talk) 06:57, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm referring to the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and 2010s sections. The 2020s includes Belgium's component singles chart (not the main singles chart) while the main Belgian single chart isn't included in the other sections in which Minogue managed to chart several times, moreso than US Dance chart.TheHotwiki (talk) 07:07, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I got ZERO response to this. Just letting everybody know that I added the Belgian chart positions in the 90s section, since there were only 9 columns and Minogue has more chart entries in Belgium compare to US Dance, when it comes to her 90s singles. Belgian chart is also already added in the 2020s section, so I'm assuming its fine.TheHotwiki (talk) 07:26, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can I add the Belgian Chart positions in the 2010s section and remove Us Sales? I don't know why this article has so many U.S. component charts when she clearly had more chart success in the main Belgian chart. It seems rather excessive to me that 2010s has two columns for U.S. component charts while the main single chart for Belgium is excluded, yet it appears in the 2020s section. It doesn't make sense to me.TheHotwiki (talk) 07:32, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kylie_Minogue_singles_discography&oldid=1205799532"