Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pop music/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Infobox image

What is everyone's thoughts on assorting a collage of Pop artists as the main image? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 04:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

That would be a good idea and it would cause less of a chance of an edit war over which image should appear on the main page. Also, could you comment on the above discussion as well? I need approval from the project members for the bot request to begin. Erick (talk) 05:19, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd definitely support that, and doubt one artist alone would do. Snuggums (talk • contributions) 06:28, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd support a collage.--¿3family6 _contribs 14:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

A collage sounds like a good idea. I wonder if it'd be difficult in terms of licenses and copyright though, since you'd have to list the license for every picture used. I'm sure it could work, though. S△M ^talk 22:36, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

It won't be difficult and I'm sure I saw such an image in one of the film articles. Don't recall which one, lemme try and find out. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:12, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

There's this one that's used by another WikiProject. Something similar could be made. Perhaps we could compile a list of artists to include? S△M ^talk 14:10, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

You can also see Chechens and English people for two different ways to create a collage. The first one is individual images, the second is all one image compiled of smaller images.--¿3family6 _contribs 14:22, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PlanB

This is at AfC now. Seems notable Hope some one related to this project rectify issues, if any. --βα£α(ᶀᶅᶖᵵᵶ)^(Support) 08:44, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Grammy Award templates

Suddenly a raft of less important Grammy Awards templates are being created. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards and prizes#Grammy Award templates.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Bot request

As per the new guideline on bot requests, I need to ensure that is alright with everyone that a bot tags the talk pages for every article under Pop music. Anyone have any objections or concerns? Erick (talk) 18:56, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good to me! WikiRedactor (talk) 19:50, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Sounds great! S△M ^talk 23:58, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

This has my support as well. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:30, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Also, don't we need to request somewhere to get the assessment table as well with the Wikiwork parameters? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:32, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Are you referring to this table? Erick (talk) 05:46, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Yep and we would have to request somewhere for generating User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Pop music. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah yes. Since I already created every category for the class and importance-ratings and included the category "Wikipedia 1.0 assessment" under "by quality" and "by importance", the WP 1.0 bot will automatically create a table for the project. It takes about 1-3 days. I tried to manually force the bot to run the update on the WMF Labs, unfortunately I keep getting a 404 error. Erick (talk) 08:36, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Correct, the WP 1.0 Bot has not been running to update the table and wikiworks. It is strangely logging the quality statistics though. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 10:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, well I don't know what to do. Any suggestions? Erick (talk) 19:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Yobot will run and tag with WP Pop music banner every article in the following categories:

-- Magioladitis (talk) 18:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Bot started. 15,219 new tags are expected in 680 categories. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Erick et al. Task completed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:54, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Top/High Importance articles that are Start or Stub Class

Having had a look at some of the songs/albums classified as only being at Start or Stub Class level, it is clear that these classifications are out of date. "Time After Time", which is the only song currently rated Top Importance/Start Class, is clearly way beyond this level – it's B-class in my opinion, and probably not far from GA-class (the track listing needs improving, and maybe a section on the song's structure, e.g. tempo, key, etc. would be good). Would anybody like to review the articles at Top or High Importance level, and re-rate the articles if possible?

I'm working on "Do They Know It's Christmas?" (currently C-class) with a batch of notes I made from 1984/85 British music press, so I hope to get this up to B-class in the near future... as a heads up, I am considering a proposal to delete and redirect the Band Aid article once it is finished, as I can't see any point in essentially duplicating the text across two articles. Richard3120 (talk) 20:19, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Britney photo?

Is it really necessary to include a photo? Simon (talk) 04:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

@HĐ: see two sections up about the discussion to include a collage instead of the Britney photo. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 04:53, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Introduction

Hello everyone and welcome the newly-created WikiProject Pop music! My username is magiciandude by you may call me Erick. I'm in process of getting everything started including a bot request to have all pop music articles tagged under this project and setting up article alerts. The WikiProject banner is already completed (as you can see above) so you can start tagging already. Cheers! Erick (talk) 18:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Are you developing a project-specific assessment system yet? Do we need one? I mean, we should definitely have an assessment page, not the link to Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment, but do we want to keep those criteria or tailor them to be more specific?--¿3family6 _contribs 18:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I have created an assessment for the pop project when I was creating class and importance categories. Feel free to edit it. Erick (talk) 19:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I've changed the layout to one similar to the WP:ROCK layout so it looks a bit nicer/more professional. The picture used, or anything else, can be updated by editing the Wikipedia:WikiProject Pop music/leftpanel or Wikipedia:WikiProject Pop music/leftpanel pages. S△M ^talk 23:46, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the assessment system for articles, it is fairly easy to assess an article's class correctly, but how are we going to decide the importance? This is particularly true for non-American/British artists, who may be well known in their home country but unknown to the majority of editors on the English Wikipedia. Now the tool has been switched off, the assessment table on the project page can't be searched to see what what articles have been assessed until now, and to what level. Richard3120 (talk) 20:47, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

@Richard3120: one possible suggestion could be incorporate a similar style to WikiProject Rock's Assessment page. Erick (talk) 21:27, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

What I mean is, how do we fairly assess the importance of each article? I mean, I know nothing about Korean pop artists, so I could not say whether they should be high or low importance because I don't know if they are very popular or successful in Korea. Similarly, you and I (who both have Latin backgrounds) would probably rate an artist like Juanes and his music as High importance due to his success in Latin charts, but a non-Latin would probably see that he has had almost no success on the Billboard Hot 100 or UK Singles Chart and decide he would be Low importance. It's all subjective, depending on where you come from.

At the moment the Wikipedia ENWP10 Tool is not working so NONE of the tables that list articles by quality and importance are working on any WikiProject page, including WikiProject Rock. Richard3120 (talk) 09:24, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Tool is working again now. Richard3120 (talk) 17:15, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

National charts of all countries and probably some genre-specific charts should be considered, not just the US and UK. The best policy I think is to have editors access according to their knowledge of an artist - if they do not know much about the artist, or at least how to determine the importance of an artist, than they probably should leave the article unaccessed, and maybe add it to a to-do list on this project.--¿3family6 _contribs 18:21, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree, I think we would need people from all over the world who are knowledgeable about their own charts and music scene. I just worry that this may become a never-ending project! Richard3120 (talk) 18:59, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Ideally, the project will become just that - never-ending. If we can attract new editors.--¿3family6 _contribs 13:26, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

FAR

I have nominated S.H.E for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Retrohead (talk) 07:50, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lipsha

Interested editors may wish to add to this AfD related to an unreleased Kesha album. –Chase (talk / contribs) 17:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Discussion regarding La Roux

Please comment over at this discussion, which I hope will help to clarify how information is organized between the articles for La Roux and Elly Jackson. Thanks, WikiRedactor (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Little Mix discography

I have been keeping an eye on Little Mix discography, and the main problem with it is the editor Little Mix Croatia insists on adding supposed worldwide sales figures to singles and albums in the article. These figures, while they may be correct, are completely unverifiable: they are sourced from the fan blog littlemixdaily.com, which in turn sources them from the forums of Digital Spy (credited on the article as "DS Blog"). This means it is user-generated content and the figures are unofficial, so they should not be used on Wikipedia. However, despite removing them more than once, Little Mix Croatia simply adds them again – I have left a couple of polite messages on his/her talk page asking him/her to stop, but I have not received any acknowledgement or reply, and judging by this edit he/she does not care for following Wikipedia procedures.

I don't like taking this to WP:ANI but as I have had no response on the user's talk page, is there anything else I can try before taking the next step? Or should I just forget it? Even if the link to littlemixdaily.com is kept, the fact is that the link is to a regularly updating news page where the oldest messages fall off the bottom of the page, so in a short space of time even this link will be out of date and a dead link. Richard3120 (talk) 14:10, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

@Richard3120: I just removed it all and kept the page on my watchlist. Let's see the user try now. That link is a gross unreliable fan-site. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 14:23, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree, it's completely unreliable, but having already reverted twice I'm wary of falling foul of WP:3RR and I really have no desire to get into an argument when there are other articles that I am working on, on which I can use my time on more profitably. Thanks for taking this up, IndianBio. Richard3120 (talk) 14:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

@Richard3120:, the spam user Little Mix Croatia has been indefinitely blocked by an admin for spamming. I think that should take care of the article. Keep an eye out for his IP. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 13:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. I think it's safe to say he/she was pretty much a one-issue editor, and judging by this message, felt they deserved to "own" the sole rights to edit Little Mix articles. Richard3120 (talk) 13:34, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

FAC

Katy Perry is currently a featured article candidate. Feel free to leave input. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 02:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Nothing but the Beat

The correct format for this album title really should be sorted out once and for all – it was suggested on the talk page as far back as 2011 that it should be formatted as Nothing But the Beat, which seems correct to me, and for the reasons suggested by the editor. Either way, it needs to be standardised: the article title uses "but" in lower case letters, while the article text uses upper case for both "But" and "The" (definitely wrong). I just wanted to run it by other editors to check I have interpreted the MOS correctly in this case, then I'll put it forward for a move request. Richard3120 (talk) 14:30, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

An FAR

I have nominated John Mayer for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:53, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/25 (Adele album)

Interested editors might voice their opinion in this AFD. Adele falls under the Pop criteria. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 16:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Good Article Reassessment of I Hope You Find It

I Hope You Find It, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Malea McGuinness

Is this person notable? If so, can anyone reference any of the information from someplace other than her own website? Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:54, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maybe You're Right

This received no commentary during its first week and has been relisted. Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:17, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

20 Rihanna song articles nominated for deletion

Interested editors may discuss here. –Chase (talk / contribs) 16:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

TFAR notification

I've nominated a WP:FA article related to this project for WP:TFAR consideration as Today's Featured Article, please see discussion at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Irreplaceable. — Cirt (talk) 20:40, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

FAR listing

I have nominated Selena for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:48, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

The Waterboys' Paul Brown

Hello! I see you may have an interest for The Waterboys' Paul Brown article. The artist requested help on the IRC channel recently to develop this article, and made a copy and paste copyvio draft on the talk page (which has already been taken care of and deleted). As a result of this, I talk to them a bit and got them to post a list of possible sources on the talk page instead. I've copied the WikiProject banners from the band's talk page, and this page will need to have each WikiProject assess their own importance and ratings on the topic. Thank you for your assistance. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 20:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Filmographies & Videographies for pop music artists

Hello. I'm looking for some guidance on filmography and videography articles for pop music artists. This article F(x) videography contains not only the group's music videos and ones they've guest starred in, but also video "teasers", behind the scenes footage, and TV performances, all linked to Youtube videos (all from official sources, no copyvio). I can't help but think that's not the intent of such an article. Really, every single little recorded message from the group that was slapped up on their official youtube? But I can't find any guidelines on this at all. Suggestions? Thanks so much! Shinyang-i (talk) 05:01, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

List of best-selling singles of the 1970s in the United Kingdom

I realise most people involved in this project are more interested in the pop music of the 21st century, but I will post this here in case it appeals to anyone reading. There is a discussion on the talk page for the above article as to how to improve it – in a nutshell, the current list in the article has been copied from a chart enthusiast's own sales estimates... very detailed and well researched estimates, but nonetheless completely unofficial, unsourced, and original research, so it has to go. The trouble is deciding what to replace it with: there was an official chart of the 1970s produced by the chart compilers of the time, the British Market Research Bureau, but compared with other charts produced at the same time, and indeed with the Official Chart Company's own current list of million sellers, the BMRB chart appears to be the most inaccurate of the lot and has been widely discredited since. If you are interested in adding to the discussion, please read through Talk:List of best-selling singles of the 1970s in the United Kingdom (there's a lot of it!) – any comments or opinions are welcome. Richard3120 (talk) 21:43, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Celine Dion FAR

I have nominated Celine Dion for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:23, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Order of listing nationalities of bi-national pop music groups

You are invited to participate in a discussion about the way a bi-national group should be described in the lead of their article: Talk:Exo (band). Nationality must typically be included in the lead of Korean, Chinese, etc pop groups as part of establishing their notability, and an edit-war has erupted over the correct order in which to list the nationalities. Thanks for your input! Shinyang-i (talk) 00:29, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Best practices?

Hello. I'm looking for any sorts of 'best practices' lists or consensuses that have been reached over issues that frequently come up on pop music related article, including:

• Awards to list
• Commercial endorsements to list
• TV appearances to list
• Genres to list (I know this is a constant issue Wikipedia-wide)
• Associated acts to list
• And overall level of detail in everything

Some editors are trying to clean up the totally out-of-control kpop (Korean pop) articles, and are having difficulty because many editors are very, very passionate and (often) very young. Many editors seem to consider issues a fan point of view and not in the context of Wikipedia as a whole. I've tried looking through the archives of the Music wikigroup and through talk pages of non-Korean pop singers/groups, but it's overwhelming and I never know if I'm looking at a "done deal" or an argument in progress. Of course I've spent a lot of time with general Wikipedia standards; interpreting and implementing those standards is the hard part. Now I know why so many knowledgeable kpop editors have quit Wikipedia in frustration! Can you guys point to anything helpful? I just want to follow established consensuses. Thank you so much. Shinyang-i (talk) 03:16, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

@Shinyang-i: The album style guide is a great place to start. It provides a standard layout to follow (by no means is this standard set in stone, but merely a suggestion). Also take a look at the Manual of Style for music and the notability guidelines for music, and also the somewhat humorous page on genre warriors.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 06:09, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Nothing more specific? I've been through it all and it's all up to interpretation and abuse. I'm tired of endless arguments where no one can cite definitive Wikipedia policy or standard practice in other music genres. I'm also tired of hours of reading archives of other wikiprojects and such, looking for any crumb that will help clarify things. I'm ready to quit any attempts to improve Wikipedia, at this point, just like most other editors in this genre have done. It's that bad. Shinyang-i (talk) 06:17, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't know how more specific those pages can be. Those are the standards of best practices. I think you need to be specific in what type of information that you want, and what problems you see with the guidelines that I listed. Everything that you requested information on in your initial post is covered on those pages.

Much of what you are describing sounds like editors who are just blatantly ignoring consensus, in which case you should bring up mention of specific disputes on here or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums, and, if it involves edit warring, bring it up on a noticeboard.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:05, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

The problem is, I can't find guidelines or existing consensus discussions on how many/what kind of awards to list for a musician, how many/what kind of TV appearances to list for a musician (am I blind? I'm starting to think I am), and basically just how much detail to include. I've been through all the biography manuals of style, Wikiproject, etc, too. Is it so hard to find what is the norm across Wikipedia? Kpop articles list everything and most attempts to whittle down huge lists is met with angry and emotional resistance. Editors often insist they be shown exactly in Wikipedia where it says they can't list every single award or every single TV appearance or every excruciating detail of someone's promotional methods. They want a rule firmly telling them they can't do something; otherwise they will insist they be allowed to do it. Intense level of detail is given for the release of every song, every performance on the artist bios, to the point of ridiculousness, and none of the info is technical or artistic in content; it's all about how the song was promoted (i.e. "a teaser photo was released on Sept 1. A second teaser photo was released on Sept 3. A third teaser, etc....The highly-anticipated video was released via blah-blah platform on Sept 10. The group performed the song on Blah-Blah show on Sept 11. They performed it again on Sept 12 on blah-blah show....They were supposed to perform it on Sept 20 but Such-and-Such had a pimple and couldn't perform so it was rescheduled to Sept 21..."). By Wikipedia's notability standards, every artist who has released a song in Korea is notable because every song released in Korea automatically charts on at least one of the many national sales charts! Ditto for notability of every single song and album released in Korea - ALL notable by Wikipedia standards. The letter of notability policies are adhered to in lieu of common sense. Most experienced editors in kpop just give up out of frustration. I know these kinds of situations have to have occurred outside of kpop, as many other pop music genre fans are very passionate. That's why I'm looking outside of the little Korea/kpop world to see how similar situations have been handled in a larger Wikipedia context. This is a genre in which many editors are genre warriors and freely admit that they want to use Wikipedia to promote kpop. I just want to be as informed as possible when I try to discuss with these people, but I have spent so many hours reading through Wikipedia and feel no closer to guidance than I did days ago. Sorry to whine! Shinyang-i (talk) 22:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

For awards, only major awards, equivalent to say, the Grammys or Junos, or even industry-specific, such the Dove, or even those by a major media, such as BET or MTV, should be included. The award should be independent of individual record labels and/or artists, and designed for recognition, not promotion, of the recipient artists. With charts, only major charts are used to determine notability, so whatever editors claim that because an artist charted, regardless of the merits of the chart, are wrong. The notability guidelines specify only national charts, such as the Hot 100 or UK Official Charts, as conferring notability. For songs or other recordings, the guidelines specify "Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts." Note significant. And charts are to be independent of the industry - Nielsen SoundScan is not affiliated with any record labels. In general, just because there is no rule against something, doesn't mean that it's ok to include it. The chief operating principles are consensus and verifiability. These trump all guidelines (BLP protections and copyright laws are the exception - they should never be violated). Content on Wikipedia should summarize what is in other sources, and should only cover notable instances. I've looked over some of your discussions on the WikiProject Korea page - you are on the right track. I understand how hard it can be for a handful of editors to reign in a massive amount of lesser quality contributions and contend with editors who are fans of the subject and bypassing Wikipedia's principles.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:16, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

You've been really helpful. I feel much more comfortable in my positions now, feel like I have a better understanding of the policies and norms. Thank you for your patience and helpfulness!! Shinyang-i (talk) 02:30, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! Glad I could help.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 06:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Which award you may or may not include depends on context and the particular artist. The examples given above are awards you would include for sure, but there are many other awards the inclusion of which might be warranted in the context of a particular artists. Note the examples above are bit US-centric to begin with. For example in the case of non-US artists, various national awards might be appropriate. Ultimately the mentioning of an awards depends on its importance for the artist('s biography) and whether and what way it is mentioned in external sources. For lesser known artists it might make sense to include lesser known awards (provided the award is featured accordingly in the sources).--Kmhkmh (talk) 14:35, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I provided US (and Canadian) awards just because those are what I'm more familiar with. Any national award (for example, Norway's Spellemannprisen) should be appropriate. The key with any award is that it should have a considerable degree of independence from the artists, and not be designed for purely promotional purposes. There are numerous independent awards in many countries. When I said major awards, I meant significant. For example, the People's Choice Awards I would consider noteworthy. The We Love Christian Music Awards I would not consider particularly noteworthy. Sure, I might mention them in an artist article, but I wouldn't list them under an awards ranking.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:29, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Cry Me a River

Interested editors are invited to discuss whether or not there should be a primary topic for "Cry Me a River". Talk:Cry Me a River#Requested move 27 January 2015. –Chase (talk / contribs) 23:02, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sugar (music video)

Comments are requested here if anyone is interested. –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:11, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Oricon (Japan) archives gone

Hello. I'm trying to work on articles about albums and singles released in the late 1990s in Japan. It appears non-paid access to Oricon's archives is gone (Oricon is Japan's major chart); nothing can be accessed for either chart placements or sales figures. I've found figures for both sales and charting on the Japanese and Korean wikipedia versions of these articles, but they're unsourced. I have tried and tried to look for articles talking about these items but neither country keeps old articles around online much. I have no doubt the JP & KO Wikipedia articles are accurate, but ... what do I do? Do we simply have no such data for any releases in Japan before 2005? (There are a lot of broken reference links JP articles nowdays because of this.) There's a similar problem with Korea, in that nothing before March 1999 is available online, and even then it's spotty based on what's available at archive.org. How are situations like this handled? The information seems non-contentious and I've never seen it challenged, but... ? It took me many hours to find one reference for one very famous Korean album from 1997, and any day now that news article will probably be purged (many Korean newspapers can't be archived). Thanks for any guidance! Shinyang-i (talk) 05:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I understand your frustration – although it's much easier to find online information about UK chart placings or newspaper artivles, I much prefer that people include the full citation for the printed version, with an URL link if available... many websites delete old content after a few years, and then it's difficult to be able to track down the printed version if a proper reference has not been cited. In this case I'm not sure there is much that can be done – unless somebody has access to the Oricon chart book, it might be that the Japanese chart information will be deleted eventually. :-( Richard3120 (talk) 22:43, 2 February 2015 (UTC)