Talk:Échame la Culpa

Latin music Mid‑importance

	Latin music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Latin music (music performed in Spanish, Portuguese and the languages of Ibero-America, see project scope for more details) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Latin musicWikipedia:WikiProject Latin musicTemplate:WikiProject Latin musicLatin music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

English title

We can not affirm an official title when there is no reliable source that affirms that the title of the song in English is "Put the Blame on Me", since other sources credit it with other titles, it would be a good thing if there was an English version of the song as it happened with "Me Rehúso".--Philip J Fry / talk 12:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please point to policy. It doesn't have to be an "official translation" or "official English title", there isn't such a requirement as far as I know. Quote "there is no title in official English"? Hayman30 (talk) 12:17, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have no problem in using a translation, but it happens that in the infobox it appears practically as an official title, when it is not.--Philip J Fry / talk 12:20, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To quote Template:Infobox song, the parameter description is "the English translation of the name of the song". My interpretation would be a simple translation but not an "official translation" of any sort. Hayman30 (talk) 12:31, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, but what I want to say is that there are several translations. Then how can we choose one?.--Philip J Fry / talk 12:34, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about that, but "put the blame on me" is one of the lines in Lovato's English part, so that'd preferably be the best translation, in my opinion. However, I'm not opposed to including all translation variants. Hayman30 (talk) 12:42, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I had not realized that. In fact here it appears. So, being that way then it would be nice to include this, right?.--Philip J Fry / talk 12:52, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I guess so. Hayman30 (talk) 12:55, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Portugal

The single reached number five in Portugal, but I am unaware on how to add that to the table — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sixinchboca (talk • contribs) 00:48, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sixinchboca: Can you please provide a link to the chart you're referring to? Ss 112 20:34, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://acharts.co/portugal_singles_top_50 Sixinchboca (talk) 20:43, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sixinchboca: The table under WP:GOODCHARTS contains an X mark next to the acharts listing for Portugal, which indicates we should not use it. Ss 112 20:45, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disputes...

...need to be settled here, not in borderline edit warring or snippy edit edit summaries. That's one of the main functions of this sadly underutilized page. If you are still at loggerheads after talking to each other then see WP:DR for suggestions. Ping ChrisMartinYoung and Ss112. I am not adding this page to my already insane watchlist so if I'm needed just ping me. Happy editing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @SNUGGUMS: as well. I'm honestly considering removing this sentence altogether if we can't all come to some agreement. I don't think the note should be there, because no IP or other editor has made an effort lately to include any other country in it. Then, I think the UK and US peaks should be mentioned, because as I have pointed out twice in my summaries now, they are two of the world's biggest music markets. The fact that the song performed well in plenty of countries (mostly European) and then 46 in the UK and 47 in the US gives a nice bit of contrast for how the song fared elsewhere. As I also said, songs don't have to perform well in countries for this to mentioned in the lead. Its commercial underperformance in major music markets can be just as notable. It's not as if positives or high chart positions are the only things that can (or should) be mentioned. Ss112 04:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Based on what I've seen in the past, highest charting territories are the main highlights for a lead to include regardless of market size. It also seems kind of abrupt to jump from 10's, 20's, and 30's to 46 and 47. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:50, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, perhaps we've seen different pages. I've seen songs where it's been noted the song performed well in European countries but in the UK and US didn't get that far on the chart. Others start with low peaks in the UK and US then mention secondary markets. Ss112 05:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the mentioning major makerts, my experience has been similar to SNUGGUMS. The main highlight of a song's charting performance, which usually gets a brief mention of in the intro article, is the highest peaks, regardless of major music markets. It makes sense to me because charts are charts, sometimes the great performance of a song in a marginal music market can make its sales in that market exceed those of the same song in a major market. It's not even about sales in the first place so why does underperormance at one major market matter at the expense of correlation and consistency when the song has success in the majority of music markets overall? In beneral, why would UK and US disappointed peaks matter more to a Wikipedia reader than nations where the song found success? The UK and US peakes are still mentioned in charts section, nevertheless. About the note, Demi has a considerably large fanbase of younger ages and her articles often get persistent vandalized by fake info; meaning almost always resorting to protecting articles and block IPs as a final solution. A note like this might help decreasing the probability of such cases. And I know putting such one on pop stars related articles take time and energy for marginal results hence they're not that frequent; I don't see it doing harm tho being mentioned in both the intro and charts sections. If there's unfavorable consensus towards such act among users, that's a different story. SalimIrangi 16:17, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Cover art

I can't find a policy or guideline that says JPG covers should be replaced with PNG covers. I see no apparent difference in quality between the two and you have provided no reason at all for your replacement and later reverts. Please let me know if I'm wrong, going back and fourth isn't going to solve the problem. Hayman30 (talk) 13:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no policy about them, but probably there should be. Just compare the quality of the images and you will see that there is a difference. JPG tends to ruin the quality of the picture when you put the image in the infobox. On the other hand, PNG keeps it clean and clear as it originally is. — Tom^(T2ME) 14:38, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]