Template talk:Infobox album

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Albums (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Language parameter for English-only albums?[edit]

Over the last three days, more than a thousand articles have been given the language = English parameter. (See the contributions by Jb423.) I do not think this parameter is useful or needed if the album is entirely in English. I think the guideline should say that English-only albums do not need the parameter to be filled out and added. This instruction would help us avoid bloating the infobox with extraneous information. Binksternet (talk) 18:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree, it should only be filled in if the album is in another language (either in part or wholly). I think adding that to the guideline is a good idea. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 19:48, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. --Michig (talk) 21:39, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
I also agree. Doctorhawkes (talk) 23:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. Is there a way to batch-revert Jb423's adds (instead of one at a time)? --Musdan77 (talk) 00:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
I will write a bit of guidance into the instructions—I want everyone to comment on it or tweak it as needed.
Regarding batch reversals, perhaps Jb423 has a bot, and can be convinced to undo the work. The fastest action seen in contributions was about 1 edit every 25 seconds. Also: Twinkle's rollback feature will work pretty quickly. Binksternet (talk) 03:56, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Okay, I appended the following sentence:

  • Do not use this field for albums entirely in the English language, by English-speaking artists.

Please comment on the change or tweak the instructions as you see fit. Binksternet (talk) 04:05, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

👍 Like Mudwater (Talk) 14:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Looks fine to me. --Michig (talk) 15:17, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Disagree (somewhat): I agree there's a problem to be fixed, my watchlist brought me here. However, I think the above wording is brutal overreaction – here are some of the deal-breakers, for me:
  1. I think the "English-speaking" generalisation, within a negative precept, has WP:CSB issues, e.g. Rainbirds release predominantly English-lyrics music, so they are an 'English-speaking' act – However, they're (all?) German and their releases are not overwhelmingly of English lyrics (some, esp' early hits' lyrics are Deutsche), while the above negative generalisation precludes use of the field on their releases – where, I think, demarcation would be extremely useful to many Rainbirds readers.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  2. IMO, the English dialect used on an album is often at least as informative to a releases character, as a genre-sub-field (especially true for {post-}imperial languages: Spanish, US English, Mandarin, Portuguese, etc.), and much of any contrary opinion is based in WP:BIAS, e.g. London grime is predominantly in Multicultural London English, in the case of The Streets' Original Pirate Material I recall some of their MTV videos were sub-titled – yet the above wording would preclude clarification in the Infobox.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  3. "artists" → "acts" (better encompass bands / 'solo's / individuals / etc.)   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  4. <to be continued (something else I was thinking of earlier)>
Overall, I am against restatement of the obvious but, I'm strongly WP:CSB and, not for muting relevant cultural refinements / cross-culturalisms, i.e. I'd rather have the chaff that the above clause (of anything so generalised). Thus, I think, a broad negative constraint is a wrong approach to solution and limited-inclusivity (positive) clause would better a winnowing, e.g. of the form – "English language per se, many only used in this field under the following circumstances: ...". That way, there's less risk of trampling significant/valuable culture and provide a better means of refinement, where trampling becomes apparent later.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Agree: This has been discussed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums several times, including here, here, and here. The consensus has been that in the English Wikipedia, English is assumed and need not be specified. This is also consistent with stuff like books. HairyWombat 21:03, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: This discussion should have taken place over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums, not here. Also, no action should have taken place (except to ask User:Jb423 to pause) until there had been a discussion and a consensus reached. One day is insufficient time for this to happen. The process, here, has been flawed. HairyWombat 21:03, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • I have added a note pointing here from the Albums Project talk page. I don't see such a terribly flawed process as you do. I figure we can hammer out the proper wording without too much drama. Binksternet (talk) 21:50, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Reply to DjScrawl: You make good points... I realize there are different ways to word the restriction, some of which will allow unusual-but-useful deviation from the main recommendation. The artist/act that releases most of their albums in English but a few in another language might be an exception. And I recognize that the description of the artist/act as "English-speaking" is not clear enough for useful deviation. I think it is more about whether the artist's album is widely known/expected/assumed to be in English. An edge case worthy of discussion might be the album Viva! La Woman by a Japanese duo living in New York City. The album's lyrics are primarily in English but it also has some French, Italian and Japanese bits inserted into various (primarily English) songs. Is English the expected language of the group's albums? Or is English a surprise because the two founding members were born in Japan? Should the other three minor languages be listed along with English in the infobox? Binksternet (talk) 21:31, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

  • I agree with changing it to "acts" instead of "artists", but otherwise I think it looks fine. Simple, straight to the point, and if there are any corner cases where saying "English" might be worthwhile (as mentinoed by DjScrawl above), then the talk pages for those articles can discuss it and come to a consensus to ignore this guideline in those rare cases. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 00:57, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Various proposed wordings[edit]

Not everybody is happy with the new wording so I propose the following few examples. Feel free to add more examples and we can discuss them. Binksternet (talk) 03:12, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

  1. Do not use this field for albums entirely in the English language, by English-speaking artists. (The recently added wording.)
  2. Do not use this field for albums entirely in the English language, by English-speaking acts.
  3. This field should typically be empty for English-only albums.
  4. This field should be empty for most English-only albums. Local consensus may determine the usefulness of showing the album to be in the English language, or in a specific English dialect.
I see no point in trying to dictate all the corner cases (because there are too many). To me, 3 looks the best because: a) it is the simplest, and b) critically, it contains the word "typically" and so permits exceptions for corner cases. HairyWombat 17:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Agreed, 3 looks best, and allows for corner cases. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 17:52, 7 November 2013 (UTC)


English I have never understood why users of this encyclopedia should/could/would assume that a creative work is in English just because this edition of Wikipedia is. That makes no sense to me. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:24, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Because users of this encyclopedia have learnt from experience that such an assumption is correct almost all of the time. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, which is why there is the parameter |language=. HairyWombat 01:13, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Award and recognition parameters for single, song, and album[edit]

I can't see any parameters for album awards, which surprises me. I think the nearest there is to this for {{infobox album}}, {{infobox single}}, or {{infobox song}} is 'Certification' for the latter. Surely it would be greatly useful for nominations and won awards such as Academy Awards and Grammy Awards to be summarised in the infobox. Is there any consensus to this? — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 22:09, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't see these as being "key facts" about an album. It also seems unlikely that enough albums would have significant awards to be listed here, and thus will not be relevant to enough articles to merit inclusion. Lastly, at what threshold do we include awards in the infobox (in other words, what constitutes a significant award)? Just Grammy winners? MTV Video Music Awards? Youtube Music Awards? Teen Choice Awards? Terrorizer's Top 100 Black Metal Album Awards? And so on. I think it's another parameter that will either not be used on most articles, or will become full of the most insignificant awards, bloating the infobox unreasonably. I think inclusion in the article is enough for this information. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 03:39, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Proposed addition of a "format" parameter[edit]

I would argue that the arbitrators did a terrible job of informing the various projects about the ArbCom case or its outcome. They're worse than most of the admins who pick and choose which cases they will discipline and which they won't. Thanks for telling us now and I suggest that you go back to both arbitrators and tell them to do a better job. And furthermore, BrownHairedGirl, don't scold us for things you think we should know when you've never made an effort to inform us of it prior to now as well. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:49, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

How should 'previous album' and 'next album' be used?[edit]

Should these be used only for "main" studio albums, or also include things like compilation albums, live albums, remix albums, EPs and so on? I've seen it used differently for different artists, and there's no guidance on the template page. Popcornduff (talk) 19:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Previously, the album project wanted to have a separate chain for studio albums, live albums, EPs, etc. But after a discussion in 2010, the project now wants one single chain of all releases. If you see a chronology field being used to only display "main" albums, it's likely because it hasn't been updated since the 2010 discussion. Fezmar9 (talk) 21:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your answer. I'll do some updating. It seems to me the "album" tag is now misnamed, because it's unclear what "album" encompasses (is an EP an album?). I think this could also be explained more in the article. Popcornduff (talk) 22:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't think there ever has been a consensus on how to use this and there certainly isn't any consistent usage. That outcome of the discussion from 2010 appears to be 'maybe we should have a poll'. Leaving it blank would be preferable in a lot of cases. And no, EPs are not albums. --Michig (talk) 22:10, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Seems to me we should get a consensus! Popcornduff (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps I misunderstood Popcornduff's question, as I don't believe "leaving it blank would be preferable in a lot of cases" is an acceptable answer unless we're talking about the beginning or ending of a chronology chain. I thought he was asking about the "next" and "previous" album fields in general... Fezmar9 (talk) 01:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
I was. I don't understand what "leaving it blank would be preferable in a lot of cases" means either. Popcornduff (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
After doing some digging, the change was implemented on August 31, 2011, and according to the edit summary, consensus was achieved. Fezmar9 (talk) 01:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Nice work! Can this information be added to the template description? edit: I'm being stupid, it's already there. Popcornduff (talk) 01:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Should labels be pluralized?[edit]

On Template:Infobox single, one of the labels is Writer(s). On Template:Infobox album, the labels that could possibly have more than one value (e.g. genre, label, producer) don't have the "(s)". I added a few instances of "(s)" in the sandbox - see Template:Infobox album/testcases. Should these be added? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:29, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I support adding those. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 18:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
I think adding (s) to things looks ugly. Is there some way we can just write "Genres", "Writers" etc when they're plural, on a case-by-case basis? Popcornduff (talk) 19:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Music infobox genre[edit]

Hello, I have proposed a change to the genre field in infoboxes related to music (albums, singles, music artists, etc.) here. If any user could comment on it it would be greatly appreciated it. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)