Talk:Pepe (song)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pepe (song) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Infobox

Which release should the infobox for this article refer to?--Laun chba ller 14:47, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All of them. Separate them with <br /> tags. Technical 13 (talk) 16:43, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Really? What good will that do?--Laun chba ller 16:51, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It will prevent the article from becoming one-sided. This appears to be a stub that is barely hanging on. I'm not going to nominate it for deletion myself, but I would understand if someone did. None of the releases has enough information on its own to stand out. The article really needs some more content before worrying about which release to put in an infobox that isn't even on the page yet. hint - hint Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 17:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I mean what good will the <br>s do? They'll automatically stack beneath each other.--Laun chba ller 18:24, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, my bad, I misunderstood you. Using br to stack items in infoboxes is the norm. I suppose you could do it as a bulleted list if you prefer, as I've seen that too. The important part is that each one gets its own line, how you do that is up to you. Technical 13 (talk) 18:44, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

Technical 13: As you have dealt with this article before you are the best placed to settle an argument in my opinion. I take the view that everything after the reference in the lede regurgitates the main text of the article (in more words). Caden disagrees. Who's right?--Laun chba ller 13:15, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Argument? Since when is a discussion considered an argument? As i told you twice before, the lead is supposed to summarize what's in the body of the article. Caden ^cool 13:25, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. It shouldn't regurgitate it.--Laun chba ller 13:52, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? If you want my opinion, the article is so short, that there is no reason to have the subsection at all really. It should probably be just the one paragraph lede and tag it as a stub until more can be added. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 15:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]