I just wanted to point out that MOS:TITLECAPS, that you pointed me towards, says the exact opposite of you – in the list of words that are always capitalised, it includes "Every verb, including forms of to be (Be, Am, Is, Are, Was, Were, Been)". Anyway, I'm not going to edit war over it, but I think it's likely that some other editor will revert this to a capital letter in the future. For now I'm going to add chart placings to "Halcyon" and "Lush 3", as the references are poor at the moment and I don't want to see these articles put up for AfD. Richard3120 (talk) 21:15, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct, reverting. (Although I find it amusing that all of this was typed out over a single character being changed) Lazz_R20:25, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're right – didn't want to get into an argument over it, just wanted to let you know for future reference. I always enjoy looking at WP:LAME every now and then to remind me that some things really are too trivial to get into an argument about over the internet. ;-) Richard3120 (talk) 22:07, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello...
...and Happy New Year. Followed your page from the RM nom, and saw you like both electronic and ambient music. On the off chance you've missed her (probably haven't but who knows) have you checked out Poppy? Could always use more eyes on a good page. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:21, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yes, edit the singer's pages, but whatever you do, do not listen to or watch any of her videos. If you go against this good advice make sure that you later tell people that you do not belong to a cult led by Poppy (she makes us say that). Enjoy, and good meeting you. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:39, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good. And if you are tempted, ask someone to padlock your computer and give the key (or better yet your computer) to a random passerby to dispose of, in a river or snowbank, and thank goddess for your decision (lol). Just kidding of course, she's quite the talent on several levels, and her and her associates, esp. Titanic Sinclair, are intent on making her the queen of the internet and the millennials, and they couldn't have come up with a better or more surrealistic but informative "candidate". I'll leave you alone now, to bask in the New Year, which is quite baskable. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:59, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@MarioSoulTruthFan: If there was an article for it, there would be no issue in adding it at all. Navboxes are used to navigate between articles and do not serve as a comprehensive list, so anything listed without a link must be removed. (further reading: WP:NAVBOX)Lazz_R01:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello.
Before I may thank you for your edit and clarification about the Zedd article, maybe you don't know about what I'm about to tell you, but I found the source in the Russian Wikipedia (ru:Zedd), where you can find the patronym name since he's Russian.
Best regards.
@Lazz R: I understand. That's weird because as far as I know, all Russians (and some former Soviets, like Ukrainians, Belarusians and Kazakhs) have a patronym (may use it or not). Anyways, I talked to Zedd directly to clarify. Jorgicio (talk) 00:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Poppy template
Hello. Noticed you unimaged the template, and mentioned it was one of the rules of musical artists templates. Probably is, but I've looked at the page you linked, and other pages, and can't find anything about images. Are you sure? I probably just missed it or didn't go into the right page (there are so many guideline pages on Wikipedia that they could float a boat). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, yes you are right, it isn't shown on the page. Images are unnecessary for musical artist navboxes, and cannot be used on them. Therefore the "image" parameter is not included. Hence why there are no famous singers or musicians etc with images included in their navbox. Lazz_R10:42, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I meant I can't find anything that says that images cannot be used. Was that a discussion somewhere, or is it listed as a policy? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking about it, maybe an image on smaller templates like the Poppy template, where is wouldn't be intrusive and remove needed horizontal space? Randy Kryn (talk) 00:57, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Well there has most likely been a discussion about this in the past, which would take some digging up to find. But if the navbox template literally does not allow you to add images, then images are not allowed. I seemed to have mistakenly assumed that this was listed as a policy/rule on the template page Lazz_R17:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. Individual's templates are allowed to have images, although I and others tend to keep images off of large templates. Most major singers and bands have many entries, and those templates include such a large map of Wikipedia pages that images compress the horizontal template space way too much, and should not be used. Templates like the Poppy template, however, have enough room, and I think some would look better with a nice image. The Poppy image, for instance, is complimentary to the topic and template, and I'll return that one as you removed it without discussion. I won't place images on any other singers' templates, and don't often edit singer's templates outside of keeping watch on the Beatles, and just a few other, biographical templates. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It won't fit, so I see what you mean, that the singer's template excludes images. Maybe that's a discussion to have at that project, especially for smaller templates. The guidelines overall allow images, so it's either, as you say, a discussion that's been had already or something as simple as not updating the template to accord with that site-wide decision. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:02, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that seems quite likely. This is similar to how Template:Infobox musical artist has missing parameters, although they were recently removed from the template. It used to be possible to include "spouse" and "children" with the artist-specific infobox, but those options were removed after a discussion. So it is likely that something similar has happened to its navbox equivalent Lazz_R19:14, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. In future, when doing content splits like this, please attribute (in the edit summary) where you got it from. All you said was "Created discography article"—you didn't create the content, you moved it from Khalid (singer). This requires attribution. Thank you. Ss11215:35, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lazz R, you may have noticed the Remix artwork for "God's Plan" you uploaded got removed, because it was "a cover, not a remix". Luckily I've found this version of the song, which is basically Drake's original, but with new verses from Eric Bellinger. Would you be able to upload the artwork to the article please? Cheers, --Theo (contribs) 21:09, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How can "Too Much of Heaven" be the successor to "Blue (Da Ba Dee)", when "Move Your Body" came out around October 1999 and "Too Much of Heaven" in February/March 2000, so definitely a few months earlier? --ChrisHamburg (talk) 16:26, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisHamburg: Because "Too Much of Heaven" was originally released on 11 May 1999 in Italy, as stated in the article and several discogs entries (though this is not deemed reliable). Yes, the international release was February/March 2000, however on Wikipedia we use the a release's first release date as its main one per Template:Infobox single - "The earliest known date of commercial release". This is similar to "Blue (Da Ba Dee)", which was originally released in 1998 before an international release in 1999. Lazz_R18:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I see. I think that the entry on Discogs is questionable, I literally have never ever heard any member of Eiffel 65 mention this, however they did talk about how international labels asked for MYB to be the second single. Also by May 1999, Blue wasn't even too much of a hit song yet but was about to pick up steam, so why would they bother to release a successor right away? And lastly, if I'm not mistaking, all tracks from the first album but Blue were produced within 1,5 months between summer and fall 99 (although they said TMOH was an instrumental demo from 1997 that they repurposed and added vocals). --ChrisHamburg (talk) 06:22, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisHamburg: You have raised good points, you seem to be more knowledged on these singles than I am. However we don't want any WP:OR on the article, so it'd be best to find a reliable source that states the release date of this song and stick by it. Lazz_R10:12, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Remixes section
Hey!
Regarding the remixes section from Justice discography page:
Well, I could say exactly the same - please justify edit of the remixes table format with any reason. Old one is makes logic sense, standardly named after "year - artist - name (remix title)". This sort of name is present everywhere, and I never saw "title (blank remix name) - year - artist" yet.
Old: 2006 - Franz Ferdinand - "The Fallen" (Ruined by Justice) <- this is how you google or name things
New: "The Fallen" - 2006 - Franz Ferdinand <- this is makes no sense
I will note that this format is used on several major discography articles (deadmau5 discography, Calvin Harris discography, Avicii discography, Marshmello discography, Daft Punk discography (partially, as theirs is merged with production credits)). It makes sense to use this format because it's consistent with the "singles" table; title - year - <everything else>; the title has the same width and is also a row (has a grey background) and in my opinion nicer to look at when it is consistent like this. My justification for removing the name of the remix is that the section is a list of the songs that they have remixed, it would only theoretically be needed to state the name of the song for the reader to know that Justice remixed it, the name of the remix beyond that is trivial. However many major discography articles (Martin Garrix discography, also Daft Punk discography) do not follow this, so admittedly it may be necessary to include the name. But my recent experience on this website is that people want things their way and my attempted justifications go nowhere, so I have reverted the remixes section to your desire. Lazz_R10:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw in your profile that you are Russian-speaking, so I'll continue in Russian to convey all my thoughts)
Я уже замечал такой вариант таблицы ремиксов у других исполнителей, и я в корне считаю его неудачным. В синглах такой формат выбран во многом из-за расширяющихся чартов, это выглядит удобно и правильно, т.к. цифры с двух сторон обрамлены текстовыми колонками, таблица преобретает более целостный вид.
В ремиксах чарты не указываются. Если ремикс попадает в топы, то скорее всего он становится синглом и, как следствие, попадает в таблицу синглов. Помимо этого, в таблице синглов последний столбец - это альбом, на последние столбцы пользователи обычно обращают внимание в последнюю очередь, столбец по значимости и не является важным и несет скорее вспомогательную информацию, по сути его можно опустить. С последним столбцом "исполнитель" это в корне не верно. В первую очередь пользователю важно узнать чей это трек, а уже потом его название, т.к. в обратном случае, глядя в таблицу, сперва считывашь информацию об одном лишь названии трека неизвестного исполнителя и знанием того, что условные Justice его заремиксили. Чтобы правильно считывать информацию с таблицы взгляд должен делать движения [2 - 3 - 1], что не совсем удобно и правильно. Подстраивать разметку под единый вид и единые цвета — это, конечно, хорошо, но здесь, в первую очередь, нужно исходить из важности столбцов.
Я не уверен насчёт расположения столбца с годом выхода, по нему идёт сортировка и группировка треков и, по-моему, сортировка также должна совпадать с расположением и приоритетом столбцов, но это не точно) Касательно названия ремиксов, я лишь придерживаюсь позиции полноты информации, важной для пользователя. Иногда музыканты делают несколько версий ремиксов, и я считаю, что оба варианта должны быть указаны в таблице. А техническая информация, как например Co-producers для ремиксов Daft Punk, по-моему, совсем не нужна пользователям. На данный момент я считаю наиболее удобным такой вариант таблицы ремиксов: Maceo Plex#Remixes. Жаль, что на вики нет единого шаблона по всей дискографии электронных музыкантов, там можно было бы прийти к общему мнению, рассмотрев все доводы. Я лишь призываю к удобству для конечного пользователя, на ремиксах Justice я не настаиваю и оставляю окончательный выбор на твоё усмотрение) Solidest (talk) 15:58, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ну, я имею писать Русский, но я ни имею на сто перцент. Tак что извините есле чтото ни написано не прав.
Если честно, я не думаю что это разумна чтобы васговаривать на этот теме больше. Я считаю что мы оба правы, и что это все полностью сабиектив. Я в соглашении что здесь должен буть одно правельну таблиц для ремиксов. Ну, пусть тогдо оставем этот таблиц как он есть. Lazz_R17:12, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Moving articles
It would be much more polite if you would discuss potential article moves on the article Talk page before just barging in and doing it. It would be much appreciated by your fellow Wikipedians. There is no rush here: if you think you have a better (or correct) name for an article, just say so on the Talk page, ask if anyone has an objection, and give it 4 or 5 days. Then, if no one objects, go ahead. Every time you rename an article, it means that you think someone else's judgment was wrong and your judgment is better, so you should, at least, give the people who have been editing the page a chance to make their case. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:40, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ssilvers: Hello, I do apologise. It was wrong of me to move the article with no addition to the talk page. I have not done it this way before, and I usually request the move and have a discussion on the talk page. I have requested moves many times, the majority of requests of which have been successful. However, I assumed this was a stub article that someone had just created, so I corrected the disambiguation without realising that there were many people working on the article who were discussing it on the talk page. I will no longer move pages without discussion in future Lazz_R00:55, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lazz R: I wonder why my article Love U (Marshmello song) and You and Me (Marshmello song) were unpublished (and your article Ritual) but Chasing Colors, Moving On (Marshmello song) and Twinbow with the same structure didn't, any thoughts about this? hueman1(talk)02:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@HueMan1: Yeah, I do not understand myself. Some articles slip through and get untouched, others are watched like a hawk in terms of notability. I cannot see what "You and Me" looked like prior to redirecting, however upon looking at "Love U", I noticed that it was incredibly underreferenced, with only two references to primary sources, of a store page. References are what prove an article's notability per WP:GNG. Twinbow has several sources to prove its notability, but no chart positions or anything substantial that is listed on the article. But I do not know what my thoughts are on this, I feel as though some editors may be biased in some circumstances. Lazz_R12:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lazz R: Should we make a discography for Dotcom? I was just wondering because if Forbes confirmed that he is Marshmello, so that means we should add his remixes and singles in Marshmello discography? Any opinions? I left a message in the discography if you would like to discuss the topic. hueman1(talk)05:24, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No it does not. Wikipedia has standards, please take a moment to read WP:GNG. The summary states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list". Linking Rayge DeMarco's iTunes and YouTube links (primary and non-reliable sources) does not equate to "reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Other editors discussed this when the page was deleted the first time, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rayge DeMarco. However, there are also rules to specific articles, such as WP:NMUSIC. There are a list of things that may justify an article, of which it meets one of them, #2 - "has had a single or album on any country's national music chart", which "Friday First" has; charted in the Netherlands. Spotify charts do not count per WP:BADCHART. The page is not properly cited, because the citations are mostly WP:SPS (self-published, socal media) and WP:PRIMARYSOURCES (directly related to or created by the subject). Reliable, non-primary sources are needed to verify the subject. Please read the rules and requirements for an article before creating one, although providing references does comply with WP:V.
However, I will consider that you have opposed to the deletion and I will retract the proposition, and convert it into a nomination instead.
@Hadhadhad13: At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rayge DeMarco (2nd nomination), a user noted that the Netherlands chart position is fictional, and so is the minor hockey career, as he doesn't appear on the team roster for the years stated in the article and in the reference. So unfortunately the subject does not qualify for any of the (even minor) article requirements. It was tagged with G4 (recreation of an article that was voted as delete), and nominated for speedy deletion. Apologies that my attempt to prolong the deletion for you has resulted in the article being instantly deleted. Lazz_R15:40, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Capital letters JES
Please undo all of your recent edits regarding the capitalization of the artist named JES. As a member of her management team we have spent years maintaining her brand with name JES (all caps). Correct grammar aside this is the way the world recognizes her and we need to maintain this spelling (JES) throughout it's usage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwiper (talk • contribs) 02:26, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
While I understand the conflict with MOS:TMCAPS the result is that you have renamed an artist for the purposes of search results which is obviously wrong. You can mention the stylization in the article but her artist name is JES. If this goes against MOS:TMCAPS then you should look at how effective the guide lines are within the context of the wikipedia. It's a living document that feeds the rest of the internet with (hopefully) accurate information. Right now it's feeding incorrect information about the artist JES. If you check the short bio of her google knowledge graph you'll see that it now doesn't list the correct representation of her name (JES) anywhere. In doing so it's reverting years of branding work and making it harder to find correct information about an artist the rest of the world calls JES, but wiki needs to call Jes even thought that isn't the name on her music profiles, musical works, trademark, registrations with the music industry professional bodies, iTunes, Spotify. Tidal etc etc etc. It's also going to mess up the feed through to the google auto-created youtube topic channel for JES which means it will mess with youtube search results. Very soon when you google her the picture will even be incorrect. It's time to review the guidelines and the implementation of these guidelines as it's damaging the accuracy of the information in wiki and beyond. Wikiwiper ... sorry for any breaks with protocol, I'm not an experienced wiki user.
@Wikiwiper: This an encyclopedia, not an extension of Google. If Google is using the title from here and you need to use a different name for your branding then you should contact Google and tell them to change it. The Wikipedia policy is not to use a stylisation unless it is a clear common name as measured by usage in independent sources, the bar for this is very high and allows for titles such as eBay because they in the dictionary that way. As far as I am concerned she is Jes Brieden, known by her first name which is Jes (everyone is where i'm from). The fact her branding uses capital letters does not change the overriding usage of the English language. You may want to read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) as well.
It is questionable whether this article is about a trademark. I would prefer to see it as an article about a person. But note that MOS:TMSTYLE suggests that the lead is correct. Jes Brieden (born May 10, 1974), known mononymously as Jes (stylized as JES). And if Google does not pick up on that then is a problem you need to discuss with Google. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 22:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Frayae, thanks for the response. I appreciate that everyone is doing a great job of enforcing wiki policy here regarding naming policies etc. My point was that in the wider usage of the site the policies are sometimes making it harder to find what we're looking for not only in wiki but also across the rest of the internet. I was asking if the editors / wiki policy makers would like to review the current practices and guidelines to see if they feel there might be better way to handle situations like this one. As wiki is such a valuable resource I think it's in the interest of all parties to keep improving it wherever possible. To follow up on a few of your points, yes we're talking to google most days about maintaining up to date information along with most of the other major profile hosts and sites. The problem as I mentioned earlier is that none of them exist in abstract and they're all pulling data from each other which is where the inconsistencies start to become a problem that spreads very quickly. This isn't an isolated case and it seems like it could benefit a lot of users. Again not quite sure how to sign off correctly here, but grateful to have someone to discuss this with ... 2605:E000:99C0:7100:1496:F94:5E92:4951 (talk) 19:12, 4 August 2018 (UTC) @wikiwiper.[reply]
I do understand your concerns, but Wikipedia policies have been debated by hundreds of people for many years. One of the basic tenets of the policy is WP:NOT. In the long list of all things Wikipedia is not, it includes Wikipedia articles about a company or organization are not an extension of their website or other social media marketing efforts. It would be difficult to change a policy to allow for articles to be kept up to date with what are in effect marketing reasons. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 19:48, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Saving Light featured article nomination
Hey, I was wondering like to review the article Saving Light for it to hopefully become a featured article. The article previously failed it's first featured article nomination because only one person contributed to the review (which became a support in the end). If you have any criticisms/concerns about the article, please check it's good article review, the articles talk page and/or the first featured article nomination to be sure that the concern wasn't previously said by another user and addressed by me. However, if you do have any criticisms/concerns about the article that I haven't already said by another user, I would gladly address them and attempt to fix it. Hopefully, in the end, you would support the article and it would be promoted. Micro (Talk) 06:45, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing, I can only see a few format nitpicks that I'll note in the talk page, and its a shame it has no chart positions. But it looks like a support from me, from what I can see so far Lazz_R13:32, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
DJ Sasha controversy
Nationality section on his talk page has been set up. I suggest you go there and put forward your case.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sellsomepapers (talk • contribs)
Hello! I noticed you reverted my edit back to the original hlist on the Deadmau5 article. I apologize about the WTF! if it caused any concern, just attempted to fix hlist format which I actually thought someone had placed the WTF! about the error in formatting. I am curious as to why you are leaving those two groups unlinked and are you aware that the spacing in the list appears to be corrupted in its current revert formatting? Just trying to help. Thanks! Sirsentence (talk) 18:36, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there, BSOD and WTF? do not have articles so there is nothing to link to. (I actually wrote an aticle for BSOD at one point, it failed the notability guidelines and was deleted). All of the other parameters using hlist work fine and I do not see any "corruption" from using the template, the error may be on your end or on different devices. Alternatively, you can use the flatlist template which shows the same list format, but please do not use breaks. This causes a vertical list instead of a horizontal one. Thanks, Lazz_R19:33, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lazz_R!
Hi Lazz_R! Nice to meet you! I'm Kiodos from Germany. I'm new here! :-)
You did a wonderful job for electronic music! WOW!
I am trying to create articles about Matthew S, an Italian artist, winner of Mtv awards, he has many articles about him.
Can you help me? Your help is very precious for me!
Thank you so much!
--Kiodos (talk) 14:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thank you for your appreciation of my efforts on here. I'm happy to welcome any new users. Awesome, if he's won significant awards and has reliable independent sources writing about him, then he's sure to qualify for WP:NMUSIC, I'd be up for helping you write an article about him. Lazz_R21:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Cool, I have formatted the infobox, I think you may have uploaded a non-free (copyrighted) image so unfortunately, if that is so, then it will be deleted. I will suggest adding an awards table to showcase his MTV wards and prove his notability, though I may add this if you like. Lazz_R01:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your help!
For the image I have already sent an email, I have permission to publish it, it is free copyright.
Could you add the awards table to showcase his MTV wards box?
I'm not able ... Excuse me!
I've just started creating this article.
Thanks!
--Kiodos (talk) 07:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}