Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Albums (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Template:The Life of Pablo[edit]

Should Template:The Life of Pablo be nominated for deletion? I never see navboxes for specific albums. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

There are quite a few of them Category:Album navigational boxes - X201 (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Since Template:Kanye West songs contains links for all the same songs (and listed by album) and the templates would appear in the same articles, it is redundant navigation. 16:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
@X201: Hmm, not all of these are templates about individual albums. I don't feel too strongly either way, so I will let others decide. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:24, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Update: The template has been deleted. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:47, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Anyone have access to the album Blunderbuss's liner notes?[edit]

This is a long shot, but I was wondering if anyone had access to the liner notes of Jack White's album Blunderbuss, because I'm having issues finding a reliable source for the Personnel listing. As far as I can tell by the article's history, there's a good chance the Personnel listing was adopted from Discogs, which is crowdsourced. The best source for credits that I can find is this page from AllMusic, but it doesn't contain the level of detail given in the article (i.e. the tracks each person contributed to). If anyone with access to the liner notes could check the Personnel listing in the article for accuracy, then the liner notes can be used as a source, and that would resolve the issue. It would also be helpful to check for missing people; I noticed that Bob Ludwig and Vance Powell aren't listed in the Personnel section despite working on engineering and mastering, and I would assume that they're credited in the liner notes. Thanks, Hadger (talk) (contribs) 03:05, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Hadger, I've checked my personal copy against this discogs entry: https://www.discogs.com/Jack-White-Blunderbuss/release/3566352 as far as I can see the entries are entirely accurate, you can check some of the pages of the album booklet against the discogs entry here for your own piece of mind: http://mimsnotebook.blogspot.com/2012/11/jack-white-blunderbuss.html. Hope this helps :-) EL Foz87 (talk) 15:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
@EL Foz87: That's very helpful. Thank you so much! I'd like to cite the copy that you checked, so could you tell me which format your copy is in (CD, vinyl, or digital download) as well as the ID on your copy? (I think the proper name for this is the category number, and I believe it can be found somewhere in the liner notes, perhaps the back side; it seems like vinyl copies tend to use TMR followed by three digits, while CD copies tend to use an 11-digit number.) Hadger (talk) (contribs) 17:29, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Hey Hadger, sorry for the late reply, doing shift work. I have the CD format it appears the category number is XLCD-566 and it's a UK pressing can't see any other identifiers apart from one after the copyright jargon on the back which is LC05667, hope that helps :-) EL Foz87 (talk) 20:52, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
No worries! This is exactly what I needed. Thank you! Hadger (talk) (contribs) 19:01, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Brave Words & Bloody Knuckles[edit]

Could Brave Words & Bloody Knuckles and/or the website be reliable? I don’t know that much about the print source, but the website has a big about us page, even featuring Martin Popoff, who has wrote a greate amount of books about music. ~SMLTP 00:07, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Anyone? ~SMLTP 10:53, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Metal isn't my area, and I know nothing about Canadian publications, but the fact it ran as a print version for 15 years (as a proper magazine with an ISSN number, etc.), is still going online, has what appears to be an editorial structure, and includes well known contributing journalists like Martin Popoff and Greg Prato, makes me think it's an acceptable source. I personally wouldn't have any problem accepting it as a reliable source, but I think I'd probably defer to Sergecross73 and Walter Görlitz here, who are likely to know more about this genre and type of publication. Richard3120 (talk) 13:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
It seems like I've seen past discussions for Brave Words when looking through the talk page archives in cleaning up the WP:ALBUMS/SOURCES list earlier in the year. Seems like its reliability was debated, without any clear consensus, if I recall, though I'm not sure. I can try to look around later. Sixty, you can look through the talk page archives some if you want an answer faster than that. Sergecross73 msg me 14:24, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Martin Popoff is a very promising sign that it's reliable, but don't let my statement alone declare this reliable. Let's see what else we can find. dannymusiceditor oops 18:53, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Seems reliable as in print for so long, with editorial oversight and experts involved, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 18:11, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, looking it over, it looks like much of their staff has been writing about music for decades, and done so for other publications and fanzines. I think their credentials, and long existence in the music industry, are enough to consider them an WP:RS, unless someone points out some serious counter-evidence. Sergecross73 msg me 18:21, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

RfC notice[edit]

Please see Talk:Buddy Williams (country musician)#RfC on discography format. Thanks! – Reidgreg (talk) 13:25, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

This RfC could use some additional input! – Reidgreg (talk) 17:31, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Discobuzz as a source[edit]

Hi, I just wanna know your opinion about this website called Discobuzz. It seems to be an online CD shop, can it be used?. Also, I wanna know if you think the product on the link (Shakira's "Pure Intuition" Remixes CD) seems realiable to you? I'm having my doubts about it. It says it was released by Energy Records from Germany, but I can't confirm their existence. Thank you. --Paparazzzi (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

It's only a promotional CD, not an official release, so the question of whether Discobuzz is a "source" (I'd say no) becomes irrelevant, because this CD was never commercially available. Richard3120 (talk) 21:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

searching for ace records brooklyn ny[edit]

Hello everyone, I am trying to locate any information on Ace records. It was a small independent label in Brooklyn NY in the 1980s'. I am trying to find anything written about this company to add to an article i am drafting. Carolcappetta (talk) 00:27, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

If anyone can help you here, it will be 78.26 or Chubbles... Richard3120 (talk) 01:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Hey, that sounds fun! I'm not going to be available much for the next few days, but I'll try to help out. What were some of their artists? I'm afraid a name like "Ace Records" will be a bit difficult to search, but if I have a couple artist names it helps. Then we'll see if it meets notability standards. Thanks Richard3120!78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 04:59, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
I'm sure Carol wants the information for the article she is drafting on Derek Reese, so there is the name of at least one artist. Richard3120 (talk) 15:28, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
So, this is not the famous Ace Records label out of Mississippi that we have an article on already? (If so, Discogs has it wrong.) I'm afraid I don't have anything on an Ace out of New York in the '80s. There was also a guy named Warpozio who was at one time a real whiz with label articles, but I don't know how active he is these days. Chubbles (talk) 01:58, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

the band nu clear energy was on ace records and the band called big boys Carolcappetta (talk) 15:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Carolcappetta, I don't think those were the same Ace Records label... there have been lots of labels called Ace Records, in the US, the UK and in Europe. Richard3120 (talk) 16:14, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Happened to scroll by this. Chubbles, if you want a better chance at getting to Warpozio, he's more active on Dutch Wikipedia these days than English, you could see about what's up over there. dannymusiceditor oops 17:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
So is it this label? Reese was signed to that Ace? I don't have any substantial information about that label at the moment. Chubbles (talk) 20:25, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes that is the correct ace records :-) the big boys record came out in 1982, and reese made a record in 2011 and yes, it is the same ace records. But wikipedia doesnt recognize discogs as a reliable source ? so now what ? If i search derek reese big boys, under images i found the album cover and the record, but it is a picture that reese uploaded to his google plus account, same goes for the big boy video, it was uploaded to youtube, so notability is still an issue, Carolcappetta (talk) 12:59, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it is, because Reese's album came out in 2011. The trouble is, I just don't think he's notable enough for a Wikipedia article, however hard Carolcappetta tries to establish notability. Richard3120 (talk) 21:43, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
I agree. I don't think this is the same label. In any case, it certainly has nothing to do with the Ace Records from Mississippi of the 50s and 60s. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 11:59, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Just to correct a statement above, Wikipedia does recognize Discogs as a reliable source for some things. There is no blanket prohibition. The existence of the album and that it was on a label called "Ace Records" would be supported, but not which Ace. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:59, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Carolcappetta, Walter is correct about using Discogs for a reliable source in certain aspects, but the problem is, Discogs is currently showing that the Ace Records label of the Big Boys and the Ace Records label of Derek Reese are NOT the same Ace Records... so in fact using Discogs would hinder, not help, your search. Richard3120 (talk) 15:37, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
It is the same ace records, big boys isn’t listed, but it is the same company, but non of this matters because Wikipedia doesn’t recognize Discogs, so it’s back to square one again. Carolcappetta (talk) 16:00, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I added the Discogs to Reese;s page, the big boys release, and the album he produced, that was also released under ace records. Carolcappetta (talk) 16:51, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Both albums are now listed on Discog's under the same ace records, so maybe this is a state for reese's notability.I know its not much, but its something, Carolcappetta (talk) 23:14, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
And this is a case where Discogs cannot be used. It does not help an album prove it is notable. It does not help to prove a musician is notable. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:23, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

So what is the least amount of notability that a person can have to be approved for a wikipedia article ? I don't understand how reese isn't notable as a musician ? his name is credited with a two famous recordings on major labels, his music was accepted for 3 music libraries and his music was used a few times on tv shows, and he has been on television ? he has 2 releases with an indie label, not self published ? why is this not enough ? Carolcappetta (talk) 00:49, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

See WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. Generally, if the press are writing about a subject after one release, they're already notable. If they're not being written about after fifty, they're not notable. It's not about a how many releases the subject has, it's about what sort of notability those releases have generated. This is now a different discussion though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:32, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

AllMusic links[edit]

It looks like a lot of the links to the AllMusic album reviews have changed. For example, the album ratings template in the current version of "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" has this link,[1] but now should have this link.[2] Did these AllMusic URLs change recently, or did I miss an older discussion about it? And is there any fix for this, other than going through lord knows how many album articles, and updating the links manually, one by one?

References

Mudwater (Talk) 10:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

From what I've seen we've generally stopped using the former, and I'd guess it's been that way a while now. However up until recently I believe clicking on those old-format refs still worked. Guess not anymore. We could get a bot to do it, but we'd have to request its use and anything involving bots is completely out of my wheelhouse. dannymusiceditor oops 13:49, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
  • agree it needs a bot as there are an awful lot of refs that need fixing, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 13:57, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
The editor Holiday56 is doing exactly that, updating the links one by one, but I'm sure he/she would appreciate the help of a bot. The {{AllMusic}} template should probably be removed from the album article style guide, as it is now obsolete. Richard3120 (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
The {{AllMusic}} template is not obsolete, I'm pretty sure. The id= parameter just needs to be updated to the new value, and the tab=review needs to be removed, if present. I'm not a huge fan of the template, but it seems that it's still okay to use. Mudwater (Talk) 16:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Not obsolete, exactly. There's a difference between "not used" and "deprecated". It's just less popular than standard format. dannymusiceditor oops 00:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I meant, obsolete from a user point of view... even if we updated the code, I'm not certain anyone would use it. There's a {{Certification}}, for example, but everyone abandoned it years ago for {{Certification Table Entry}}. Richard3120 (talk) 16:19, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

─────────────── It looks like WP:BOTREQ is the place to request bots. So, I guess we should post a request there. But first, what do we want the bot to do, exactly? Find the outdated links to AllMusic album reviews, and update them to the current links, right? In articles with the WikiProject Albums banner on their talk pages? But, should we try to define it a little better before we make the request? For example, I guess there will be two "flavors" of updates -- full-fledged links to AllMusic URLs, and links from the {{AllMusic}} template. Also, is there an easy way for the bot to recognize the outdated links? "P.S." I don't know how hard or easy it would be for a bot to find the new URL for a particular album review. Mudwater (Talk) 01:25, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

I've submitted a bot request, at Wikipedia:Bot requests#Updating links from album articles to AllMusic. Mudwater (Talk) 18:31, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

"Rave reviews"[edit]

There is a discussion regarding the language "rave reviews" is neutral or appropriate for the article, Astroworld. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 07:34, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Labeling instrumentals[edit]

So, this question was posed to me recently, and it was one of those things that I've seen handled both ways, without any real discussion that I've been aware of, so I figured I'd start a discussion on it.

In track lists of album articles, should there be a "(instrumental)" next to instrumentals tracks? To see what I mean, see Meteora (album)#Track listing on song number 12. Should it say "Session" or "Session (instrumental)"? Its not a question on whether or not its an instrumental - it is - but rather, should we put the label there or no?

I don't feel too strongly on it either way. As a reader and music fan, I like seeing it. But as an editor enforcing guidelines on an encyclopedia, I'm neutral. Thoughts? Sergecross73 msg me 16:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I would say no, unless it's labelled as an instrumental as part of the tracklisting on the actual album, in which case it should (our tracklisting should reflect that on the album as far as possible). If it's important that the reader know that one more tracks are instrumentals it can be covered in the prose. There are also cases where a track may have only a few words or no words but some vocal noises, and then it comes down to editor opinion on what is or isn't an instrumental, so it can become a bit of a minefield. In the case of Meteora above, it isn't labelled with '(instrumental)' on the album, so in my view it shouldn't be in the article. --Michig (talk) 16:32, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Agree with Michig. Whatever the liner notes state, that's what we should attempt to reflect. If the liner notes do not exist, then however reliable sources list it. As a side note, that's another reason to have "producer" rather than "production" for the album's producer. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
No. Why would we call out a song for being an instrumental but not one for having 5/4 time signature or being 320 bpm? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 17:37, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Completely agree with Michig and Walter - go by what reliable sources (i.e. the sleeve notes) say, otherwise it's OR on our part. And as Michig has rightly pointed out, when you get a track which has vocal sounds but not actual vocals on it, that's an edit war waiting to happen. Richard3120 (talk) 17:48, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Some liner notes, particularly those for classical music and certainly dance music, do indicate the piece's tempo, and if the liner notes indicate the content, I see no reason not to convey what the artist or label felt important. It's rare to indicate a song's time signature anywhere but in its score or an extended analysis of the piece so I would say that's not a reasonable counterargument. However, even in a recording like Time Out, where changing time signatures is the purpose of the recording, only the background discusses the time signatures as the liner notes do not discuss them. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Sometimes what they think is important is thanking their high school math teacher and writing a short essay on veganism. The function of an article here is not to reproduce the liner notes: sometimes those are inaccurate or a joke. The goal is to give users a certain set of information. What exactly the liner notes say and how they are formatted is irrelevant. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 17:59, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
I've seen artists and labels include "management", "road crew" and "special thanks" sections, but we don't need to include those because it's not directly about the album. We could discuss the essay, etc., in the background section using prose. Liner notes and how they are formatted are a reliable source, and so they are most relevant. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:04, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Earlier I voiced my support on adding them, but Michig and Richard have excellent points. I never thought about what might happen with, say, Nothing More's "Pyre", which has an audio clip but no vocals from Jonny Hawkins. Also, Richard noted that it's OR on our part, and I honestly should have thought about that before. Adding "instrumental" to these is like saying "oh, you can tell this is progressive metal just by listening to how many weird rhythm changes are in it!" Wow, wish I had learned the hypocrisy behind my actions. dannymusiceditor oops 18:25, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Walter, as I pointed out above, liner notes are frequently inaccurate: they are incomplete, include jokes, or use terminology that we don't have to reproduce exactly (e.g. The Minutemen are always credited with "singing" but it's okay to put "vocals"). Liner notes are useful as a starting point but are not a veto on our style or presenting accurate information. Funny little asides are worth mentioning in prose but not in the lists of personnel or tracks. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 18:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Wow, I’m surprised how strongly people feel about this, considering how widely I’ve observed it being done. But it could just be an enforcement thing too - we’d probably all agree all genre should be sourced too, but I also feel like I could pretty quickly find five stubby album articles with unsourced genre pretty quickly too. Anyways, good to know for the future. Thanks for the input. Sergecross73 msg me 13:54, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Recommended sources[edit]

I'm trying to improve the article for the 1997 film Spawn and get the quality to at least B class. The Soundtrack section mentions various versions of the album, extra tracks, and special editions, and the section needs references to properly verify all this (frankly I don't have any doubt the albums exist but citation needed tags were barfed all over the article even in cases where it was pretty obvious the citation at the end of the paragraph covered the whole paragraph). I normally edit film articles not music articles and in the past I would have simply used links from Amazon.com as a basic way to verify that an album exists and the track listing at least matches the edition being written about but I'm wondering if there are better options and that someone here might be able to recommend good sources for Album articles in general and film soundtracks in particular? -- 109.79.161.65 (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I can't speak to albums specifically, but here is a list of reliable sources that I have found through experience to be dependable for information about popular music:
A much longer list of music sources can be found at WP:MUSICSOURCE. In particular, AllMusic, given its breadth of coverage, is likely to be the best source for the information you seek, though be advised that the website's sidebars and album/track lengths are not considered reliable. I have noticed that the soundtrack section of the Venom article contains several references citing Discogs, and I feel I must stress that, because most of the content there is user-provided, it is not a reliable source, and it is never appropriate to directly cite Discogs (see WP:USERG and WP:NOTRSMUSIC for more information). What is acceptable is directly citing the photographs hosted on Discogs taken of physical media (List of songs recorded by George Harrison is an excellent example of this being done). I hope you find this useful, and best of luck with your editing. LifeofTau 01:55, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
If you have physical copies of the special editions in question, you could take the information directly from them; that would quality as cataloging/publication data, and I don't think there could be a more reliable source for verifying it than the item itself unless, for some reason, there were doubt about its veracity (e.g., with a bootleg release, but that's moot here). Chubbles (talk) 02:09, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. -- 109.77.209.152 (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

RfC about album reviews[edit]

Talk:Boy (album)#RfC: Should two scores from Rolling Stone, from the same year, be included in the ratings box? An RfC has been added that may be of interest to this group. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:31, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

There is a deletion discussion about Major Lazer's unreleased album here - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Music Is the Weapon (2nd nomination)[edit]

Editors are welcome to comment. Flooded with them hundreds 11:50, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Still Dangerous - Thin Lizzy live album 1977[edit]

ref.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Still_Dangerous

Just added some content whose direct source is the content of the album itself. How does one best cite this?

This is in response to an erroneous/misleading statement in the article for the film The Expendables, which mentions that the song "The Boys Are Back in Town" is used over the end credits. I edited this to clarify that the version used for the end credits is in fact the live version from the Still Dangerous album, not the more common and more familiar studio version from the Jailbreak album, which I thought was a worthy inclusion in terms of historical interest. But I do not know how best to cite this information to satisfy Wikipedia policy.

BTW mine is not the only edit of this page that received a .[citation needed] reminder; the prior editor apparently had the same problem I have now.

As a point of interest I was actually in the audience at the Tower Theater on 20 October 1977 to see the show that was made into the Still Dangerous album. That's my scream heard after "Soldier of Fortune" at the start of "Jailbreak"!

This is one of my favourite bands ever (like many others I get protective over Phil Lynott's legacy). Help & guidance appreciated!

JComet (talk) 16:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@JComet: When directly citing an album, the appropriate templates are {{cite AV media notes}} (for liner notes and other physical packaging) and {{cite AV media}} (for the recording itself). LifeofTau 00:46, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Gaon Chart Sourcing[edit]

Good day!
My question is regarding whether i can include sales from specific chart (summed from several years).
About the chart:
Gaon Music Chart, which is produced by the Korea Music Content Association, publishes monthly and yearly physical album (amongst other things) sales in South Korea. According to their faq page (http://gaonchart.co.kr/main/section/faq/list.gaon?f_type=SITE&community=faq) - monthly chart is compiled of data from 1st date of month 12:00AM till 1st date of next month 11:59AM (basically calendar month), while yearly chart is compiled of data from january 1st 12:00AM till january 1st of next year 11:59AM (basically calendar year).
Gaon Chart does not show compiled overall sales over several years. Monthly chart is published in format "sales this month"/"sales this year thus far", and when year ends, Yearly chart is compiled and shows sales for specific year

The problem:
I wished to compile sales of artists albums (sold over several years), but my edit was declined citing WP:SYNTH, that you can't sum sales from several years (or different months), and article mentioning cumulative sales is needed like how billboard or nielsen does it (which is highly unlikely to happen, especially for "International" (aka not Korean) artists as their physical sales are relatively low).
I, personally, do not aggree.
This seems to be our disagreement with specific editor, thus 3rd party opinion seems to be required. I kindly ask for your opinions. Kleool (talk) 07:49, 14 October 2018 (UTC)