Talk:Kiefer/Archive 2008

2,760,919pages on
this wiki

Back to page | < User talk:Kiefer


I couldn't find any standards about + sings and other similar characters from the help section. When I submitted the EP cover as ...+-0.jpg it was renamed automatically as ...--0.jpg. I thought that all inappropriate characters are supposed to be replaced with -:s. I hope this was not a big mistake. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arkwright (talkcontribs).

Not a big mistake, at all. Barely registers as an error, really. It's weird...I didn't know that the wiki automatically replaced + with - at the beginning of a line. When in the middle of a song title, it just removes it. Hmmm. Ya learn something new every day! When it comes to anything page-naming-wise, LW:PN is an editor's friend.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:39, 3 January 2008 (EST)

Question... Edit

Where might be an appropriate place to discuss the Song Of The Day and Album Of The Week pages? Their discussion pages are used for nominations, and it seems a tad inappropriate to place anything else there...

Wanted to get input on some further potential criteria for nominations, particularly that a video or audio be available for them. I think it's a noble cause "to get exposed to some new music", but I'm finding a lot of nominations can't be found on YouTube, GoEar, or other sites. I mean, what's the point in nominating a song or album if nobody can experience it for themselves?

Would also like to see some sort of "seconding" system, or a way that other users could comment on their reactions to the nomination. But won't go into detail about that here. I monopolize your talk page enough as it is.  ;-)

—  jF 02:01, 4 January 2008 (EST)

Right now, I would say that because the amount of nominations we get tends to be exactly what we need to have one a day, that a seconding system or some such might be a bit premature. Right now, WillMak tends to work on AOTW stuff, and I have lately been trying to get the SOTD stuff up to par for the front page. Currently, we're the seconding system.  :-] Perhaps when we start getting a bunch more nominations, then such a thing will be necessary, although I would be concerned with "buddy" votes and other problems. Sometimes it is just better if an admin takes the heat over what is used, rather than groups of users "competing" against other groups to get their nomination used. Some people would take the nominations a bit too seriously, if you know what I mean. I agree that having videos and audio available is more desirable than not, but I also know that there are worthy pages that might not have a YouTube video or GoEar audio clip. Sometimes the lyrics (such as my really old-school nomination for The Kingston Trio:A Worried Man), have to just stand on their own, I guess.
I think that your idea to include YouTube and GoEar whenever possible, however, it a great idea, and should be meantioned on the SOTD nominating page. I love it so much that I have already added the suggestion to the LyricWiki talk:Song of the Day page! Maybe that will get a few more updates when people nominate!
If you want to expound on your ideas for a future system, that would be great. It would be nice if one day we had to have a different method of weeding the list. You can either add it here or e-mail me if you think it is just too long or whatever.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:49, 4 January 2008 (EST)

Song Template alteration Edit

I've added a new comment at Template talk:Song#Altering template about changing {{Song}}. I'd appreciate it if a few of the "veterans" around here looked at my comment and replied before I changed our most used template here. --WillMak050389 14:38, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Esperanza Newsletter Updated for January Edit


Sean gorter is thinking about creating a request-to-be-an-administrator page. Those who have an opinion may post their thoughts at LyricWiki talk:Administrators.

Members' Corner

Esperanza is in need of more collaboration as its members look on being a member as a simple honor. If Esperanza is going to help, it needs to have more participation from its members and other users: spread out the WikiLove, convince more to help the community, and other acts to help LyricWiki through the website and become one of the most visited lyric sites on the internet (google search on lyric ranks LyricWiki as #x>67 {x=unknown})

Sean gorter 04:42, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Um, I hope you are not offended... Edit

I seem to notice that your sig is excessively long. In Wikipedia (refer to page on signature customaries), signatures are limited to 255 characters. The reason?

  • signatures that take up more than two or three lines in the edit window clutter the page and make it harder to distinguish posts from signatures,
  • long signatures give undue prominence to a given user's contribution,
  • signatures which have long HTML/wiki markup and contain no spaces cause other editors' edit boxes to show unnecessary horizontal scrollbars (such signatures may have spaces added to them by any editor),
  • signatures that occupy more space than necessary in the edit box displace meaningful comments, thus forcing the editor to scroll when writing his reply, and
  • the presence of such long signatures in the discussion also disrupts the reading of comments when an editor is formulating his reply (all direct quotes from Wikipedia)

As a rule complier, I have stuck to these rules and adhered to them all my membership. However your signature is 746 characters long. May I try to shorten the signature for you or leave you to deal with it by yourself? Θ Sean gorter Θtalk|Esperanza 10:42, 1 February 2008 (EST)

No thank you.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   12:19, 1 February 2008 (EST)
Is that really that big a deal? In all my time here, I've never seen it cause problems...
King_Nee1114lyrics 19:22, 1 February 2008 (EST)
 :-) Nah, it's not really a problem here. If someone started adding links to their top ten favorite song pages or some such weirdness in their sig and made it super long, then I could see it being a problem. Mine is a bit long, admittedly, but it's all no-frills linkage. I basically adapted it from a long-time Wiki editor, as I recall. I have, however, removed some excess coding that I think/hope is basically unnecessary and therefore have shortened it, though. Ta-DAH!  Kiefer  talk  contribs  admin  23:13, 1 February 2008 (EST)
If Kiefer doesn't gripe about the length of my posts, I'm certainly not going to complain about his sig code. ;-)
—  jF 23:16, 1 February 2008 (EST)
Just's not the size that's what you do with it that counts. ;- } (My apologies, but I just couldn't resist any longer.)  Kiefer  talk  contribs  admin  23:28, 1 February 2008 (EST)
If worse come to worse, you could just create a template (protected of course) at for instance User:Kiefer/Sig and have that be your signature. Then it wouldn't be that large :P
- teknomunk (talk,E,) 03:52, 2 February 2008 (EST)

Page redirect snafu Edit

Kiefer, long time, no talk to. I've got a small problem in the Nena section. In the Nena#Bongo Girl subsection there is a link to a page for the title track of that album (Nena:Bongo_Girl). Unfortunately, it is erroneously redirecting to the individual page for that album Nena:Bongo_Girl_(1992). Do you have a suggestion as to a solution?

Fixed that for you, Megahexe. Just drop in some lyrics and whatever else needs adding, and you're ready to go.
—  jF 19:36, 3 February 2008 (EST)

SOTD nomination Edit

Wanted to bring your attention to the nomination for a "Stone Rosetta" song recently added. That should probably be moved to pending, as the correct artist is Rosetta Stone. Would have moved it myself, but I note that there are two bands with that particular name, and this nomination refers to the 1990's UK goth band. As such, not quite sure how to handle things without making a mess.  ;-)

—  jF 19:59, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks, I'll look into it.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   15:11, 4 February 2008 (EST)

I wanted to share somethingEdit

I turned your whole signature into a template. All you have to do is replace your current signature with "{{User:Kiefer/Signaturetemp}}" on the prefs page. It was teknomunk's idea, and I figured it out for my own sig. You can use it, or you can not. Except I'll be shattered if you don't.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:17, 4 February 2008 (EST)
I am kidding about that last bit though. here it is, and happy editing.

   Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin  
Thanks!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   15:11, 4 February 2008 (EST)

"extra notations" Edit

Did you get consensus to define what makes up extra notations and the right to delete them without any debate? -Lwc 13:43, 6 February 2008 (EST)

What I mean is - I left other lyric sites because here I thought a group of people would decide together on how the lyrics would look instead of "decisions from the sky". -Lwc 13:48, 6 February 2008 (EST)
I understand. The decision to remove notations seems arbitrary (which is exactly what it was, arbitrary) Lwc, what would you suggest be done about notations? Personally, I don't like the notations and don't really want to see them cluttering up the lyrics. But that is just me.
We will try to do whatever is needed so that things work for users, but we also need to take into account the fact that a lot of our users access the site by media player plugins, so whatever solution we come up with will need to function for these guys as well.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 14:03, 6 February 2008 (EST)
As said, the lyrics should be as close as possible to how they're actually sung. I'm all for writing lyrics full-out no matter what, partly because of the reason teknomunk mentioned with the media player plugins too. Some lyric viewers scroll automatically, and when the song is near the end, you probably will want to see the lyrics, and not [Chorus] five times. In my opinion, lyrics should be just that – the words that are sung, and nothing else, like the structure of the song. --MiSP 14:09, 6 February 2008 (EST)
I have to disagree with the use of the word "arbitrary", however. One meaning is that it was decided by a judge or arbitrator, but the common usage usually has the meaning of "capricious; unreasonable; unsupported". As you mentioned, the use of the site for plugins and such means that flip-floppin/scrolling/scanning for the appropriate substitution for these notations is often not as simple or friendly as it may be for the web. I recently received an Amazon Kindle (e-Book) and the site translates pretty well on it, but only a small portion of lyrics are visible at one time. Flipping "pages" to re-reference the lyrics would be a pain to say the least. So, there's a real-life example for you.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:23, 6 February 2008 (EST)
As the Help page for Song pages Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs#Lyrics states:
  • It is best if the lyrics displayed reflect the lyrics as they are found on the recorded version.
  • The use of extra notations within the <lyrics> tags, such as "chorus", "verse", or "repeat" should be used only in rare cases, such as for clarity or to shorten what would otherwise be a long list of a repeated phrase at the end of a song.
So, yeah. Long time ago this was decided.  :-]
Seriously, though, every site has to have its own formatting standards. Things morph and change here, but nowadays it is generally with additional information on pages and template changes and the like. Having what is between the lyric tags being equal to what is spoken is a long-time site standard. (This also goes for not censoring language that may be offensive.) Some exceptions do exist, such as: horribly repeated sections at the end of a song can have a (Repeats to end) or (x 15) notation or some such thing, duets and musical lyrics such as for High School Musical, or rap songs with multiple rappers tend to have the speaker added with their appropriate section. Things like "Chorus" should have the actual words placed instead. (Especially since some times the chorus has minor changes in the song.) "Instrumental" just means that the listener has to wait until the lyrics resume, so isn't necessary.
Hope this helps.
   Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:13, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Yes, now that I read it again, it was not quite the correct word. What you just said is what I meant, there needed to be a standard and that is the one that was decided on. It could have been a different one.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 15:12, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Alright, but I don't think "chorus" and "instrumental" are the same case. While I learn to accept what you say about "chorus", without the word "instrumental" the listener is sure something is wrong ("where are the words I'm supposed to hear now?"). Also, without "instrumental" you fake continuity between possibly unrelated verses. -Lwc 09:51, 8 February 2008 (EST)
I agree with MiSP wholeheartedly. The lyrics should reflect every actual word sung (or spoken) in accurate fashion. As I mentioned in a post elsewhere, the lyrics are every bit as much of the artform of a song as the music itself.
Lwc makes a very valid point about a notation of "chorus" as well. A chorus includes sung (or spoken) words, not music only (which would be more properly referred to as an instrumental break, interlude, or bridge). Since our site is dedicated to the lyrics, not the music, those extra notations are often pointless. And using a notation of chorus can overlook subtle yet important changes from chorus to chorus. Gimme time, and I'll find a perfect example of how such a tiny change can alter a song's meaning.
When I transcribe lyrics, I generally use the following rules:
• Transcription of every sung/spoken word.
• Inclusion of only actual words—nonsensical scatting, melisma, and the overuse of things like "ooh" and "whoah" is eliminated. (I break this rule when such embellishment is significant to the song, such as Ronstadt's "Ooh Baby Baby" or Tina Turner's famous first note in A Fool In Love. Or more notably, the "ba da da" refrain from this recent Song Of The Day winner.)
• Inclusion of backing vocals where they are not sung using the same melody/rhythm as the lead vocal(s), where they appear alone, or where they otherwise significantly differ from the lead vocals.
• Transcription of lyrics during fades, to the absolute point that the lyrics become inaudible.
For me, accuracy is paramount, but so is completeness. A good set of transcribed lyrics should fully document what is going on in a song, and as precisely as possible. Don't believe me? Watch the most recent round of American Idol auditions, and see how many people still get some of the most well-known songs terribly wrong. I find it unnerving to hear a rendition of "Lady Marmalade" coming across as something incomprehensible like "Itchy bitchy baklava ma, witchy scritchy ha ya gear..."
But I digress.  ;-) As far as extra notations, I would suggest removing them only if you intend to replace them with the actual lyrics. If anyone disagrees, they are most welcome to discuss it on the relevant talk page(s). But no "decisions from the sky" here—this is a community with a shared goal of accurate, complete lyrics. And you'll find many of us welcome any challenge to our opinions.
—  jF 23:56, 8 February 2008 (EST)


For a while now, a web extension called Foxytunes had a widget that used LyricWiki's site for lyrics (which is actually the way that I found my way here, a long time ago). In the last week, they have removed it, cutting us off from a lot of people. Assuming we do want our site on Foxytunes, I suggest that anyone who has Foxytunes to tell them that it's unfair. They seem to have replaced our page with Yahoo Lyrics, which hasn't worked for any songs that I tried to find (ironic), and I've seen Yahoo make some other great apps into crapheaps.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 20:43, 6 February 2008 (EST)

We don't need no steenkin' batches... Edit

Übes apparently is forgetting to drop SOTD badges on a number of songs. Noted "Ghost Of A Texas Ladies' Man", "Alive & Kicking", and "Diamonds And Pearls", but there are several others in there that didn't get badges nominated by various people.

If this needs to go on ÜberBot's discussion page instead, let me know. Figured you'd want to know, in any case.

—  jF 00:13, 9 February 2008 (EST)

Lovely. Must have an early case of spring fever or something. I'll have to check on things, thanks!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:00, 10 February 2008 (EST)

Phew... Edit

I feared all my hard earned efforts may have been in vain (hee hee)

No, but seriously, immediately prior to reading your message on the Oasis track, I hit upon the section on covers contained within the pages for new users that you kindly directed me towards. I have noted all this and whilst I would ask for your forbearance while I get to grips with this whole Wikiing (?) thing (lol), I will at the very least commence my editing (and rework those pages I have created/spot along the way) by inserting the relevant 'cover' reference coding. I research all these tracks anyway, I get the original artist, the composers, the dates, links, etc., oh and I painstakingly annotate the lyrics too so it won't be a problem. And yes, my pursuits do somewhat reflect the fact that I am a bit of a perfectionist. A person who likes to get things right.

Unrelated I know, but I had a right chuckle to myself when reading the guidelines for capitalisation (i.e. capitalise the initial letter of ALL words in song title), since I was recently persuaded by a mod at Lastfm to change the way I have tagged my music for years and adopt the guidelines as set out by MusicBrainz. These, as you no doubt know, do not advocate the use of capitalisation, save for the initial letter of the first and last words..

Oh, what is a girl supposed to do???



Hello Edit

Thanks for your welcome note.

I stupidly have started to clean up the Hawkwind Page - it has over 100 'Other Songs' on it, most of which are actual album tracks. I'm going to ignore the three or four dozen live compilations and concentrate on the 'core' albums. Nothing like starting at the deep-end!

Thanks for your help... Edit

but it would be helpful to me to know which song you were refering to when you wrote 'I did see that you removed a song from an Other Songs list that you didn't first redirect or add to an album somewhere...' because I can't seem to locate this in my 'Watchlist'.

Also the page you were referring to when talking about Footer/links. If this is Robyn with Kleerup: With Every Heartbeat then yes all the external links in the footer work because this is in fact the correct artist name for that particular song, i.e. it is NOT in fact attributed solely to Robyn. Nor is it 'featuring Kleerup'. It IS 'Robyn With Kleerup'.

Which leads me to your question as to whether the Robyn with Kleerup artist page should be deleted. Well, as indicated above, that particular song was very much a collaboration between these two artists, so no I don't think it should. An interim solution would be a redirect to the Robyn page but seeing as it was an equal collaboration between these two artists I really don't see that as ideal. Maybe it's me, but I could find no template for collaborations. I could only find guidelines for 'featuring ARTIST NAME', which this track is not. That is why I decided to use the old style formatting, so I could at least seperate the two artists and display it correctly on song page. Although as you can see it did work, is there in fact a template to be used in such instances?

As for the pages I have edited thus far..well I am indeed very grateful to you for looking at them since I would like to know that I'm doing things right. The pages I was primarily concerned with however are those on which I have attached external links/links to Wikipedia pages. I was concerned because I haven't seen any links on other pages, other than those default links incorporated in the footer and I didn't know whether I was breaking some law or other (lol).

Finally, I would also be most grateful for your thoughts on the following:-

1. Why not simply delete page if it is mis-spelt and therefore duplicated? In other words, why clog the site up and retain it (somewhat confusingly) under 'Other songs' on artist page (only partially remedying this by redirecting it)? For example Stereophonics: Hurry Up & Wait

2. When is it appropriate to request deletion of an existing song page, as opposed to redirecting it?

Oh and btw, everything I know I have taught myself. As such I sometimes get a bit lost on terminology. Please forgive my ignorance on such occasions.



Hopefully I can cover everything....
The item removed and then re-added was on the Take That page: Never Wanna Let Out Go. No big whoop.
As for the Robyn/Robyn With Kleerup situation.... You would know better than I would, I imagine, what the differentiation is between the two. Amazon lists it as a Robyn album. (Amazon is usually half-baked with the album information, so isn't really trustworthy, however.) seems to have Robyn feat. Kleerup almost as often as Robyn with Kleerup. The "With Kleerup" is prominent on the album cover, but I don't know if that is more of a special appearance thing, such as Neil Young & Crazy Horse albums, which is really and essentially a Neil Young album with his backing band mentioned, or a true duo/collaboration between the two artists. If it's the former, with it being essentially a Robyn album with Kleerup as a special appearance situation (like Queen & David Bowie doing "Under Pressure"), then the album should be listed under Robyn's artist page. If it is a true collaboration, then it should be listed under Robyn With Kleerup. Personally, I have a feeling it's more of a "Robyn" album, due to the use of "with" as opposed to "and". But as a fan, I'll let you make that decision. If another fan disagrees later, then who knows where things will end up. It just appears to me like a Robyn album with Kleerup mentioned on the cover to appeal to Kleerup fans. But once again...that's just my perception from waaaaaaay on the outside of things.
If you decide that the album (and songs) should be moved to Robyn With Kleerup (which means all album songs should be moved to have "Robyn With Kleerup" as the artist, as opposed to just "Robyn") that would eliminate the need for the hard-wired header (Song) template on those pages. Then, each page should have a "Related Artists" header, with each linking to the other. Also, the Robyn with Kleerup page should redirect to Robyn With Kleerup.
When it comes to redirecting vs. deleting misspelled pages, basically if the pagename is just horribly and hideously mangled, then deleting is perfectly fine. Especially if the page was created by a user, as opposed to the site Überbot. LyricWiki:Deletion shows what items are effortlessly deleted by the admins. The sticky situation comes, however, from Überbot scraping Lyrics from the web that have been mis-titled. If these mis-titled pages were merely deleted, as opposed to redirected, then the next time the bot grabbed lyrics there, the page would just be re-created and then deleted and so on and so on. The fact that the page was mis-titled originally also might be a clue that if someone was searching for those lyrics, that they might (perhaps...maybe...) search under that misspelled title. A lot of ifs there, I know, but in the end, a redirect takes very little server space, server power, etc., and might alleviate more headaches and hassles in the future.
No problem with the terminology. I'm no techie, just a dude with a sick need to sort and organize.  :-] You're a perfectionist, I'm an anal retentive analyzer and categorizer, we all have our little crosses to bear.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:40, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Haa haa Edit

This made me curl up...'As a rule complier, I have stuck to these rules and adhered to them all my membership. However your signature is 746 characters long....' In fact, I'm still laughing now ;)

Redxx 21:46, 22 February 2008 (EST)

746? $*#@!, I coulda sworn I didn't go a bit over 729.  :-]
Ah well, I'm at 25 now! Yes, fit as a fiddle - thank you, Mr. Apollo!
(You do know of the Bonzo Dog Band, yes? Most in the States haven't. Most of it is pretty strange stuff, but I once cranked this song through some pretty wicked speakers, and it seriously shook the place up. I wasn't expecting it to be so clear for a recording around 40 years old. Plus, my secret desire is to have a t-shirt with "Five years ago I was a four stone apology...Today I am two separate gorillas!" on it. There, I've said it. :-] )    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:40, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Deletion Upgrade That You Missed Out OnEdit

Yeah, I found out that Teknomunk can get Janitor to ignore categories that he deems suitable. Good to know, huh?
By the way, what have you been smoking tonight? You've been as queer as a clockwork orange. Do please be careful editing in this state!
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:49, 23 February 2008 (EST)

No smoking. (If only it could be blamed on that!) I've just got a strange sense of humor. (See my Britney limerick on my Pedlr page from a year ago. The link is on my User page.) I just don't get to show it that often here. All business and no time to chat...that sort of thing. Plus, it frightens the natives. I don't think Redxx is easily frightened by a dose of weirdness, though.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   12:00, 23 February 2008 (EST)
Nice... If you have an IRC client, you may stop by the channel for our site, we could always use a little life. (Shameless plug, I have no life, etc.)
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 14:32, 23 February 2008 (EST)
No, I'm not ;) In my book it's a definite plus!    Redxx    talk   17:19, 25 February 2008 (EST) <<< (hee hee - hope you don't mind..I'm not clever enough to change the style) Oh, and btw The Bonzo's (great band) - I had some album covers, etc. so I thought I would assist you on editing that page. Ok, you will no doubt find some errors, but I did my best x

Yeeeeeaaaa Edit

You checking up on me? ;) No seriously thanks. I've been doing a lot of work on the Daniel Bedingfield page..It's proved quite challenging but a good learning experience.    Redxx    talk   00:23, 27 February 2008 (EST)

Just going through my Watchlist...that's all. shhhhhhhhh, there is no Big Brother you have seen nothing you have heard nothing
   Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:39, 27 February 2008 (EST)
Btw...don't know if it's your bag, but I would prefer a different style for my signature that incorporates the 'talk' link but differs to yours, but like I say I'm not clever enough to change the formatting myself. Besides I haven't quite done it right. So if you ever find yourself sitting there bored up to the eyeballs, twiddling your thumbs, maybe you could help me out...?    Redxx    talk   10.46, 27 February 2008 (GMT)

New Song template Edit

I had a look at the page and I thought the new information was good, but I was somewhat dissatisfied with the overall layout, so I changed it. Have a look at it and tell me what you think. Also, I changed the main template page so that it includes the documentation from a separate page so that changes to the documentation don't cause all the pages that include {{Song}} to be updated (which is just about every page in the wiki).
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 03:12, 28 February 2008 (EST)

Looks good (better than before) and a good idea with how to handle the documentation. I'm thinking that all of the "official" templates, such as SongFooter, Album, Hometown, etc. should have this. Then, under the Help:Template information, the documentation page could be linked to, instead of the actual template.
I had a question about the compilation parameter, however. What should be done about "jukebox"-type albums, that are a complete mix of artists and don't really have an Artist to file things under? (The "Wow" series, for example.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   17:02, 28 February 2008 (EST)
I have used the type 'soundtrack' as there is no artist attached to the album, but if there is an artist (say, "Wow") that can be specified using albumartist (at least I think...). I can't seem to remember if this type of series has been discussed yet or not, but if so, another line can be added to the quick reference section for such a type of release.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 17:39, 28 February 2008 (EST)

Oasis songs/possible covers Edit

"All You Need is Love" is the only song on that list that I've seen Oasis play. If I search for their performance of that Beatles song on YouTube, it displays multiple results/videos. But, say I search for "Oasis Mrs. Robinson", I get absolutely nothing. So that's why I'm a little skeptical on if they ever actually played it. Now, I'm not saying that if it isn't on YouTube, then it doesn't exist, but I feel that YouTube, in some way, helps determine if songs are actually real.

I made a list for "Extra Songs" because apparently they're unreleased demos by the band. I personally never knew they existed. I just wanted to separate songs that I knew Oasis sang against songs, (such as "Mrs. Robinson") that I'm not sure they ever did. I'll change the title to "Demos" just to make it a little more clearer.

KirbyMaster14 20:59, 28 February 2008 (EST)

The YouTube check is a nice idea! That certainly doesn't help the cause for Mrs. Robinson, but I still find it hard to believe that someone somewhere along the line mistook Simon & Garfunkel for Oasis. (Not as bad as Simon & Garfunkel for Metallica, perhaps, but still....) Others that you requested for deletion I deleted, but that four that are left are songs that are often covered by other bands.
Extra songs to Demos is a very good solution. Makes the list a little more clear as to what is being listed.
   Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:11, 28 February 2008 (EST)
I just wanted to add my two-pennyworth to the aforementioned. I have spent many a long hour researching Oasis/Noel Gallagher. I also have a lot of their stuff (official and unofficial). I also use a variety of sources, including YouTube, fan bases and bootleg sites to verify the validity of all the music I obtain. I haven't looked at the list in question, but I have never come across either Noel or Oasis covering Mrs. Robinson. That is of course not to say they never have.    Redxx    talk   07:15, 29 February 2008 (EST)
It's probably the Lemonheads version as that's the one that ends up on most versions of the Oasis 'Covers CD' that have been kicking around since 2001.    Redking    talk  
Hey Kiefer this is weird. Why hasn't Redking got a Userpage? I left him a message and flicked to his Userpage and just got a blank template. Is a userpage only created if/when we create it ourselves? Another thing, unless we have two active Redkings, I think he may have inadvertently created another account when creating his signature, i.e. Redking without a capital 'K' and RedKing with a capital 'K'. I'm on the case tho' so don't worry about it. Just thought I'd bring it to your attention is all.
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 11:01, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Userpages are created only by the User. Wikiquette is generally that only the User should edit that page. That's the User's public face on the wiki. That also makes it easier to spot UserPage vandalism on the Recent Changes page. I'm guessing that RedKing has accidentally linked to Redking. I put a note on his page.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   15:21, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Yup, I managed to over-reach myself with the mark-up. That'll teach me to steal / borrow / imitate / homage (delete are required) somebody else's work. DOH! :o)
I've fixed it to point to 'RedKing' and I've no idea with regards to the 'Redking' version. I'm going to follow Redxx's comprehensive instructions to try and ensure I don't mung it up again. Thanks for the help. RedKing what d' ya think?? Edit

 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:20, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Improvement or what? Reckon I must be cleverer than I think I am! But me thinks that maybe until I get to become a real expert (like next week or something...hee hee) I should drop the 'Contributions' link. I I really want to broadcast how many mistakes I make in a day? (lol) Regards.

Rflmao...After I posted the aforementioned message I happened to notice our friend Redking's signature (hee hee) but I'm a great believer in that 'Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery' Charles Caleb Colton. And no doubt you'll also be pleased to know that I finally figured out how to do signature right i.e. so as to display in the edit box without the lengthy code...just can't figure out how to get it to do the date..  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:01, 4 March 2008 (GMT)

Looks spiffy! Somehow I was expecting something a little more "hardcore" from a metalhead, though.  :-] I don't think the contributions link is all that necessary, personally. Like you say, why broadcast your swath of destruction? If they want to know where you've sacked & pillaged, let them make that extra click to your User Page!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:02, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Nah, I'm mellowed out now (I believe all that funny green stuff I had in my youth contributed to that..I mean, look at James Taylor..hee hee). Yes good comments about my signature. As I say I might well ditch the contributions link. I'm certainly ::::::considering it. Until, as I say, I get the real hang of things.
Thanks for pointing me in the direction of Archives btw. I have set mine up now and moved some messages to there.
And apologies, I know I didn't explain it very well, but what I meant with regards to the full stops is that they are built into the templates (for example the song and cover templates), and these templates are not designed in such a way as to take into account that an editor might just want to include a few additional words before ending the sentence. For example "This song was performed by Stereophonics." One might wish to add "on the 14th of December 2007". Ok, a minor annoyance I know. And yes, I could simply adjust my composition to overcome this problem. I'm just hoping that someone will consider amending the template to allow the editor the option of deleting this full stop. I hope that makes better sense now (lol)
Oh and you'll no doubt be pleased to know that you won't have to suffer all the html code on your page any longer when I leave you a message because someone took pity on me and helped me out with my signature problems (3 guesses as to who - lol) All in all a good day's work I'd say. And on that note I think I'll go to bed. Regards
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:33, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Are you implying that James Taylor was once hardcore? Sweet Baby James?!?!?!?
As for the added stuff to the template, probably that is something that can be bulleted above or below the lyrics. You know: * Recorded December 14th, 2007 at Sound Slave Studios, New York City.
Yeah, a template is nice for longer, more complicated sigs, ain't it?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:49, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Rflmao@JT and "hardcore" No, I meant the exact opposite. Not a good analogy I know, since to be honest JT did one hell of a lot more bad stuff in his mis-spent youth than smoke a little green. (Unlike me I hasten to add - lol) But you gotta agree - the guy does write some real mellowed out tunes! "When this old world is getting me down..." Actually, I think Carole King may have written that. 'This song was performed by Redxx and is a cover of "Up On The Roof" by Carole King FULL STOP' (hee hee) Just be thankful you can't actually hear me sing ;)
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 06:38, 5 March 2008 (EST)
On a somewhat related note, James Taylor, Bonnie Raitt, Elton John, Linda Ronstact, & Don Henley performed on Randy Newman's "Faust" album. I think it was written to be an actual musical, but was only performed briefly, or perhaps only for this recording. JT plays God, Don Henley plays Faust, and Randy Newman plays the Devil. The ballads are the better songs on the album - especially "Feels Like Home" by Bonnie Raitt, which I heard used (although not her singing) on a TV show last year. "Relax, Enjoy Yourself" is hilarious with JT playing the God part totally sunny and bright (so anti-hardcore!) with Randy Newman's Devil soooo over the Pollyanna attitude.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   15:21, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I've been a fan of JT's since the 70's and have most of his albums but I must confess I never knew of his involvement in this project. So thanks for the heads up! I reckon I might just have to seek this album out now.
Lol@JT playing God. All the funnier since he's publicly declared himself to be an atheist...or is that an agnostic? Oh what the heck! I'm sure a belief in 'him upstairs' wasn't an essential requirement for the role. Lol.
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 19:10, 5 March 2008 (EST) <<<<< note NO 'Contributions' (hee hee)

A QuestionEdit

Kiefer, do you by chance have Mozilla Firefox?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 18:38, 4 March 2008 (EST)

I have Firefox, as well as IE, MSN Explorer, & Opera. I tend to use IE7 with the site.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:51, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Ok. The reason I ask is Firefox has an addon called Textcomplete. You do a lot of formatting and this has shaved tons of time off editing for me. I wanted to recommend it, and so far I haven't found that sort of thing for IE.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 22:19, 4 March 2008 (EST)
Cool, I'll check it out. Might be a reason to use Firefox more. (IE7 just makes the site look prettier for some reason.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:51, 4 March 2008 (EST)
I must warn you, once you go Firefox, you never go back. There is so much more available under the hood you'll forget what IE7 is. Of course, I might be biased a little... (insert grin here)
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 03:26, 5 March 2008 (EST)
I'll second that Kingnee! Once you commit to using Firefox you realise what you've been missing and you never want to go back. I had myself been recommending to all my friends to use Firefox for donkey's years but although I have always installed it on all my pc's, until very recently I wasn't using this myself. Knowing it is supposed to be far better, safer, etc. than IE, I had of course tried on a number of occasions over the years to convince myself to use it. Regrettably however, I was simply too used to using IE. I recall that I preferred the favourites/bookmark system in IE. I also found it a tad frustrating (and still do!!) that you can't send a shortcut link to your desktop as you can with IE.
Another reason I continued to use IE was because of it's integration with the Microsoft Office applications such as 'Word'. I still find it very frustrating, when creating links in 'Word' documents to pages I have browsed on the web, that 'Word' doesn't pick up/ignores the sites browsed in Firefox.
The advantages to using Firefox however, greatly outweigh the disadvantages. For example - all the add-ons you can obtain that assist and make browsing a more pleasurable experience. Also the fact that you can easily add a lot of our favourite sites to the search bar, e.g. LyricWiki, Wikipedia, Musicbrainz, Discogs, AMG, etc. and directly access their search facility without going to the site first (a definite time saver!).
With regards to IE7 - I have heard of a number of people having problems with IE7 and also having great difficulty uninstalling this (those who don't image their drives of course - lol) and though I agree that it does look more streamnlined, I think I still prefer all the knobs and buttons of IE6.
As for the add-on Kingnee - I have downloaded it. I haven't got the foggiest how to use it mind (lol), but I'm sure it will prove itself a welcome add-ition (hee hee)
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 08:12, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Yes, Firefox is wonderful. The main item that is better with Firefox at the moment for me is that it doesn't have the button to close your current tab actually on the frickin' tab. The number of times that I've accidentally closed the next tab over by lingering too long with my mouse click is astronomical. But, this site is sooooo much prettier in IE7. So, it's all LyricWiki's fault! But I think that there's been an update of Firefox that I haven't grabbed yet, so perhaps your gentle pressure will "convert" me once again to the magical world of Firefox. I seem to recall that I once grabbed an addon that would "animate" Wikipedia changes. I wonder if that would work here...?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:41, 5 March 2008 (EST)
No button to close your current tab in Firefox? No problem amigo! Try this 'ColourfulTabs' Developer website >>> I certainly wouldn't be without this particular add on and guess what? It is also very pretty (hee hee)
My next recommendation is not simply useful, but essential for any Wikipedian 'Wikimedia+'
And this one is also useful but I confess it did kinda got on my nerves after a while 'Googlepedia'.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:38, 5 March 2008 (EST)
No, I think you misunderstood. (My sentence wasn't very clear, unfortunately.) I like Firefox because it doesn't have the tab-closing button on the tab itself. It has it in a relatively safe location. IE7 has it right on the tab, and when I close one, the next one takes its place and if I lingered too long with my click or accidentally clicked twice, then bye-bye second tab! Really dumb. As usual, Microsoft added something to make things "easier", that instead caused more problems then it solved.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:50, 5 March 2008 (EST)
AAh..No my fault..I didn't read it properly ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 07:19, 6 March 2008 (EST)
I'd like to know how it looks different, I checked that out, and I could not really tell! You'll have to tell me what I am missing out on. Granted there are quirks, but 99% of the time, someone else has thought the same thing and made an addon to augment it.
Have fun with it, and happy editing!
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 19:28, 5 March 2008 (EST)
PS. I even found an addon called IE tab, which uses IE page renderer, so you can flip back and forth in firefox with a button on the status bar. So there, you can have the cake, and eat it too!
I think that my version of Firefox doesn't anti-alias the text, while IE7 does. (My sig also goes to a rounded box in Firefox, while in IE7 it's a straight-edged box.) As for the wikianimator, I did have it, it does work here, and the download is at I'm going to test it on a page that lately has been having some edit wars, I think, to see what it shows. Do you know of a way to allow for tabbing like in IE7, where the new tab goes to the immediate right, as opposed to the far right? Now that I'm using Firefox, that's an annoyance. I don't want to hunt for the new tab that I've opened; I want it right next door!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:50, 5 March 2008 (EST)
The Wikianimator is quite nifty. I tested it out on some pages I was just working on, and it works pretty well. It adds a nice touch
Tab Mix Plus will do what you are looking for. Options -> Events -> Tab Opening -> select to open new tabs next to old one. Tab Mix will do a lot for you, I'd say that it is one of the more powerful addons, along with the All in One Sidebar, Session Manager, and Toolbar Buttons. If you wanted, I could probably send you a single .xpi that has several addons that I would recommend (there is even an addon for that!).
I hope that I am not sounding like I am beating you over the head with this stuff.
Last thing I swear: the reason that firefox rounds your signature is you have several -moz- tags in the signature. I actually thought that you knew it looked rounded, I guess I never checked when I made your sig for you.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 23:10, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Thanks for the info. You sure know your way around Firefox! I "borrowed" the basic code from another wikisite, and I figured that the -moz- tags did something, but I thought I tested it in both when I was trying to simplify things, and didn't notice any difference. I must not have looked very close! I am also currently downloading the latest version of Firefox. I was at a pitiful 1.0.7, I guess. coming my way! (I had to do this to try out the TextComplete add-on.)
Just thinking here: perhaps a page here at LW with a list of Firefox extension suggestions and descriptions might be nice. If you're willing, just set one up at User:Kingnee1114lyrics/Firefox_Extensions. If it gets really groovy then it can be copied or moved to a more mainstream location. If it helps me, then it can certainly help others. Wading through add-ons and figuring out what is useful and what is junk isn't always that simple. The description on some of these add-ons about what they actually do is pretty sparse/pitiful, too.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:24, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Trust me about the -moz- thing: I was winging it. Most of the stuff I do is of the same thread of "if I twiddle with this, what happens?" Half the time that ends up as a mess, such as an attempt of making a template with switches the first time. A funny thing: I did a very similar thing with Firefox. Back when it was really new, and was basically Netscape with a palette swap, I tried it, hated it, and only re-found it about a year ago, when my brother forced me to try it.
I think I will do that extensions page. I'll try to make a little to-do about different addons. I will agree that the addons page for each is a lot of the time really lame, but for right now, I will provide a description to the best of my skills, then a link to the page. Text Complete will be at the top, considering how much easier it makes things.
So I will post a few links for now (probably you, redxx and I will be the only ones who will even know it exists right away)
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 23:51, 5 March 2008 (EST)
Great idea! ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 07:19, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Bonzo Dog... Edit

When you got a spare minute could you have a look at the 'song' in the other category for me please and tell me what I am doing wrong with this. Only I've redirected a few albums before, but this one just keeps coming back and I just can't figure out why. All I know is it doesn't look quite the same on the album page as the others I've redirected. Thanks  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:02, 5 March 2008 (EST) <<<< currently watching R.E.M. Live in Dublin on TV

I checked it out, and it is fixed. (it was showing up as "1.redirect [[]]", which is odd)
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 20:07, 5 March 2008 (EST)

User:Kingnee1114lyrics/Firefox ExtensionsEdit

This thing is off the chain! I can't imagine the traffic when I actually tell people about this. And thank you, I am glad that it is appealing. I think what I will eventually do, as this seems to be going somewhere, is break it up into several pages with a central point. I do have it broken up a bit now, between LyricWiki oriented, firefox-greenhorn (the Kiefers :D ) oriented, and then the User_Defined spot where the user recommended ones will go if they don't fit with the first two, or the 3rd, advanced, group I have planned.
This is definitely very early, and I was planning on going the direction that you just mentioned, but I do want to keep some of the more 'general purpose' add-ons too. King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:00, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Also, I should ask: How has Firefox been treating you? Are you hooked yet?
I think things are going really well, also! I like the divisions (Kiefers, huh? *sigh*  ;]) and the "Recommended by" lines. Although, I notice that my Wikipedia Animate 1.0 from the link above isn't on the page. (It requires Greasemonkey, which should be mentioned.) Even greenhorns like myself have good stuff!
I actually haven't had much time on the computer (and therefore with Firefox) yet this week. So I wouldn't say "hooked", but I'm circling the line! (Seriously, I think all of these extensions and the program's versatility are what put Firefox as the #1 browser. It's all a matter of how one pimps their ride.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:42, 7 March 2008 (EST)
I am getting there. I was not sure whether I wanted to recommend that, with a note that it requires Greasemonkey, or have Greasemonkey with a note about that too. I took a break from it for a bit, because I wasn't getting much done around the rest of LW (I start to feel to vain if I work all on my own things too much, I know, I'm probably nuts). Also, you can post anything you'd like on that page. I limited it to admin only, just to keep things organized...Also, I cannot take credit for the "Recommended by" line, that was all Redxx.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 03:57, 10 March 2008 (EDT)

Your edit at Nightwish Edit

Hello, I just saw that you reordered Nightwish albums a lot, is there some rule on how to sort the albums and other releases? Because I like the way it was before a lot more, now all the Singles and Live recordings are just mixed up. --MetalSnake 18:35, 10 March 2008 (EDT)

The standard is to have all major albums listed chronologically, whether a studio, live, compilation, or EP album. Often, if an artist has a large number of greatest-hits-type compilation albums, then a separate header for these secondary compilations is often used with only a link to the album page, and without a track list on the artist page. Usually, the same is done to singles and demos, if there are a large amount of them such as on the Nightwish page (with 23), so as to not make the page unwieldy.
The main problem with the page and what brought it to my attention, however, was that it used Level 1 headers, which are reserved for the page title. Major albums should be Level 2 headers (2 =='s), as should other divisional headers such as Group Members, Singles, Other Songs, Related Artists, etc. Level 3 sub-headers are for Disk separators on multi-disk releases, links to singles, Current Members & Former Members list headers, etc.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:56, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
I have to agree with Kiefer, the current way is the standard. However, the page is somewhat cluttered now, the old way did a better job with organizing the page, but was still a bit cluttered. I think that the singles with the full list of songs should not be on the page, but rather linked to from under a "Singles" section. This is what I have done on one of the pages I try to keep up to date, Kotoko, and has been done on Ali Project (these are, in my opinion, the two best upkept Japanese artists here, so I like using them as examples).
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 19:20, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
If a single tracklist isn't listed, you wouldn't know if a song is already in the wiki or not by just searching the artists page. I think, the artists page should show everything. that would make it much easier to find something. I don't understand why Level 1 header would be reserved for the title, but then you could just add a = to make all Level 1 headers Level 2 and Level 2 headers Level 3 and so on. I think it was much less cluttered before, than it is now. Now you can't even see in the contentsbox if a release is a live album or just some sort of best-of or something. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by MetalSnake (talkcontribs).
True, not all songs would be listed on the Artist's page. The Artist's page, however, doesn't have to show everything. A page can get so bogged down with information that it essentially becomes useless. Most people visiting an artist page want the major album listings and links to the artist's main songs. Singles, let's face it, generally consist of remixes, acoustic or live versions of the songs, and other song variants. Hardcore fans like yourself want that information, it's true, but such fans will not be deterred by having to click on the link to the single's album page or by doing a search. The casual fan, however, is likely to be deterred if the artist that he or she thought had a handful of albums has a page that needs a few minutes of scrolling to get through. Sometimes a brand new song will make its way onto a single, and such items can always be listed in the Other Songs section with a note and link to the single that it comes from. A "Songs Exclusive to Singles" header could be created above the Other Songs list if there are more than a few of these items, if one wanted to be all-inclusive. Some have listed such songs as B-Sides after the track list of the album that the single came from. A link and a note as to the song's origin is also helpful in such an instance.
Imagine, for example, showing everything that The Rolling Stones did on their Artist page - singles, compilations, live albums...everything. It would be an unwieldy mess. The Table of Contents itself would require scrolling down to see everything! The same goes for Queen, U2, etc. And now with bands using CD singles and putting all these variants on them to boost sales to fans who already bought or downloaded their album, a comprehensive listing on the main Artist page just isn't feasible in many cases.
As for the Level 1 headers being reserved for the title, that's a Wikipedia standard as well. In the original organization, the Other Songs list was a L1, but the Janitor bot doesn't recognize that, and so created a second Other Songs listing of abandoned songs. Another aspect of making a database useful is to have basic elements of that database be uniform. The descriptions that I wrote earlier about what belongs under what type of header is part of the attempt to be generally uniform. Exceptions always pop up as necessity dictates, but certain things should follow certain formatting guidelines. Uniformity makes looking for information easier. I know that if I go to the Chris Rea page that it'll have the same basic look as the "Weird Al" Yankovic page as well as the Tom Petty page.
As for not knowing whether an album is a live album or compilation from the Table of Contents, I'm not sure how that's a problem. As on that page, a note as to the album's special sub-type can be made so that a visitor can know. The benefit of placing live and compilation albums into the regular album listings chronologically is that one knows that (in most cases) the songs contained on that album originated on previous albums and those songs on later albums would very likely not be included. Compilations also often mark boundaries of an Artist's professional output. Often when an artist is unhappy with their label, the last record released under that label is a compilation of their "Greatest Hits". New label - new direction, and later, a new compilation album collecting that work. Live albums often mark highlights in an artist's career. Live albums don't generally sell as well as albums with all new songs. For an artist's label to put out a live album (historically), there needed to be an added marketability to such an album. Dire Straits, for example, put out their live album at the height of their popularity. Putting that album in chronologically shows its historical significance.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:19, 15 March 2008 (EDT)
Ok, I still think every song should be listed on the artists page. So, maybe the way it was done on Böhse Onkelz might be a good idea? Do a list of the regular albums, then list the songs which were only on singles as B-Sides or something with the info on which single it is. Best-ofs, Compilations and singles could be just linked to under Other releases, those songs are already listed on the artists page on the regular album or as b-sides, so it would be a good compromise imho. --MetalSnake 16:43, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for Welcome note Edit

Thanks for your Welcome Note. I'll try and contribute to lyricwiki from April. Is there any provision for designing and running bots in lyricwiki? If there is,could direct me to the help page on this topic? Thanks in advance! Sauron 07:27, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

With regards to bots, you would need to speak to User:Sean Colombo, who is the site's head administrator. He's the one that can accept a bot. What is it that you would want to use a bot for? It may be that one of our two site bots User:ÜberBot and User:Janitor already can do what you need. Best Wishes,    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:35, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

Screwed Up Edit

Not a clue what happened, but I screwed up what you changed on the Bryan Adams 11 album. I thought I re-fixed it but apparently not, so I'm going to give a shot at fixing it. Sorry! (Bobbit 02:05, 21 March 2008 (EDT))

Eh, now I'm confused. Did you just update the link name, not what's displayed on the main pages? ;D

All I did was uncap the trailing words in the bonus track notations. No big whoop. Minor change. Everything is wonderful!  :- ]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:36, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Rush Edit

Sorry, I probably goofed something up. I did, however, remove the lyric tags from around the instrumental, I hope that was the intended thing...
Yeah, any time I screw up, let me know. Sorry!
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:06, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Nah, the point was that you didn't do anything wrong. I'm just lucky enough to have the source, as wikipedia was here, there, and everywhere with the title. I wanted you to know my reason for moving everything around after you had moved everything around already, so there wouldn't be any misunderstandings.
As for the lyric tags, I keep 'em around the instrumental template. It looks better, I think. Who knows whether some bot job is going to require lyric tags as a reference point or some such, too. No biggy, it's really more of a preference thing, but I like the look of the double-border. It makes the note stick out a little more visually.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:15, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
About the Instrumental tags: I actually think the opposite. I think the page looks much nicer with just the banner. From what I remember, though, is that teknomunk runs a script every once in a while to remove lyric tags from instrumentals.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:22, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
It's news to me that I run such a script :P. Actually though, after looking, it appears as if I do, but I haven't run it in quite a while. If it needs to be done on a regular basis, just let me know.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 02:33, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
Perfect example. I have been meaning to ask you to run that again. Although now I might think Janitor was doing that on it's own volition.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:52, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
I really would hate to see that script run. Visually the template is much more interesting with the lyrics tags around it. If the standard is going to be changed that the instrumental template must not have the lyrics tags around it, as opposed to the current standard of either/or, then the instrumental template needs updating to make it stand out a little more.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   15:40, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
My apologies, I thought it was the standard. Either/or works for me, based on preference.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 18:45, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

America, A Unicorn & Jimmy WebbEdit

Thanks for clarifying that situation for me. Unfortunately, I just finished all the song pages for Webb. sigh

Rick Roll Edit

As hilarious as whoever's little Rick Roll prank is, you might want to go ahead and fix it so users who aren't logged in won't get hit repeatedly such that they can't use the site, unless they're a web programmer and screw with the query string to get through. The main page, login page, everything directs to it, over and over, not just once like it said. It's enough to make someone stop using the site. --PeterJohnson 00:44, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

It should only do it once. It only did it once for me, anyhow. My initial guess is that you might not have cookies enabled? I'll leave a note for the head prankster, though.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:58, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
Thanks for the info guys. I'll start fixing that. When I go to the page it's saying "We're sorry, this video is no longer available" but it's definitely still available (can copy/paste the url into your browser)... is the same thing happening to you guys?
-Sean Colombo (talk|contribs) 01:05, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, I got like a split second of some visual and then that message instead.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:06, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
"King_Nee is a better dancer than I"? Gee, maybe I better stay away until April 2...  ;-)
—  jF 01:16, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
I fixed the logged-out user thing! ...onto the video. If anyone has any suggestions for that, I'm definitely listening! I just need a way to embed any rickroll video that will auto-play. It appears YouTube didn't like that a bunch of ppl were streaming it from the same referer? (just a guess)
-Sean Colombo (talk|contribs) 01:32, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
Sweet! It seems to be working. I used a Yahoo video and messed with it until it autoplayed. :D This shall be a fun day indeed!
Thanks for your help debugging, guys.
-Sean Colombo (talk|contribs) 01:47, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
PS: King_Nee can really bust a move.
Well, now that everyone understands that, I suppose I could fix it. (insert evil grin)
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 01:54, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
EDIT: You should notice it's back to normal. That was fun.

She's back... ;) Edit

Keifer. Hope u is Ok. Weird 'category' for a help page me thinks 'Albums released in 1999' ?? I couldn't figure how to correct this so thought maybe you might want to take a look. I would be interested to know how to go about correcting such errors, particularly since I wanted to create a new 'Hometown' category for the country of Wales (see Stereophonics), but again I was simply presented with a template in page edit mode.

Btw if I get to The Alan Parsons Project before you look at it again I'll have a bash at redirecting the long list of 'Other Songs' (Sorry to tell you that 'cos I know it's on your 'Finished' list). APP are great. I've been a fan since someone played me Pyramid in 1984.

Goes off singing "There are pyramids in my head, there's one underneath my bed...."  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:37, 11 April 2008 (EDT)

Aaaaaah!!! Duck and cover!
*sticks head up* *looks around* Whew. Looks all clear.
I replaced 1999 with "Date" so that it won't show up in that category anymore. There's probably a more elegant solution, but it works!
I believe the way we have the Hometown template set up for Wales is to have United Kingdom as the country, Wales as the "State" and then the town/city as usual. This is likely an imperfect system, as the corrolation between the U.S. system of states doesn't match well with the rest of the world. If you have some suggestions to improve it....
Yeah, The Alan Parsons Project was once "finished" and then Uberbot grabbed a bunch of new pages from the web and other people added stuff and so on and so on. Give it a good pummeling for me, eh?
I don't think I've ever listened to "Pyramid." I have "Tales of Mystery..." and "Vulture Culture" on LP, but I haven't listened to those in years. (No turntable.) I like a remarkable number of Prog Rock bands, though.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:41, 11 April 2008 (EDT)
Hee hee. APP - Aye, aye Cap'n (said in best Scottie voice).. Tut turntable?...I don't know...the youth of today... ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 15:34, 12 April 2008 (EDT)
Youth? Bah! Here on LyricWiki, I'm the Grumpy Old Man. I have CDs that are as old as most of the users.  :P
Thanks for the present BTW! That is an astonishingly weird/good. Alan Parsons has a touch of genius, indeed he does. I did recently get one of those album-to-computer turntables, though, so soon I will be able to unleash my 2 meter tall stack of records again. I just have to clear up some space to set it up. I have all the old Queen albums that are dying to turn and turn and turn again! (Old and Queen-related: I bought Queen:Jazz (1978) in a store in the mid-80s and it turned out it was a copy with the poster that from what I understand wasn't available in the U.S. except through the mail.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:48, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
Glad you liked it. And that Queen album was certainly a bit of a find. Lucky you! Will certainly be worth a few bob. Queen + Paul Rodgers (brilliant union) were on the TV here last Friday (on the Al Murray show) and done a brilliant set. (Ok, redundant comment I know, since they couldn't ever do a bad one could they? rfl.) I've always been a big Paul Rodgers fan, but since my mum thought 12 was a bit too young to be going to gigs, sadly I never got to see Paul with Free. However, I saw him with Bad Company on a number of occasions. I think Paul's a great choice as their new lead singer and I feel sure that somewhere out there, in the Great Beyond, Freddie is sure smiling about it too.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 10:22, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
Thanks for responding to my album art problem. I will keep my eye on it. I did happen to notice image errors on other artist pages on the nights I was experiencing these problems (I established this by checking the uploaded files list). This is why I thought it was a general problem. BTW I came across a very strange page in my travels, that I strongly suspect to be an attempt at 'vandalism' >> SSBMboss.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 14:21, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

The Alan Parsons Project... Edit

77 songs in the 'Other Songs' list:-

Final score = 76 to Redxx and 1 to Keifer
....Well, I didn't want you to feel left out ;-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:57, 17 April 2008 (EDT)
Woo-hoo! Finished it off. I'm whupped now. ***snore***    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:49, 18 April 2008 (EDT)
Lol, but don't speak too soon..*Redxx zaps the song [[Alan Parsons Project, The:Turn It Up]] quicker than Clint can draw and swiftly and adeptly (in the way only she knows how) redirects it to Alan Parsons:Turn It Up* it
Final score = 77 to Redxx and 1 to Keifer.
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:23, 18 April 2008 (EDT)
NOOOooooOOooooOoooO!!!!!!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:28, 19 April 2008 (EDT)
Hee hee  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:21, 19 April 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for the advice Edit

Hi Kiefer. I'm sorry I messed the lyrics. I've turned off the autogenerator.--Carpetovetonico 18:01, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Aerosmith Edit

K. As I believe you have noticed, I've given the Aerosmith page a good going over. I've looked into all the 'Other songs' (and reduced this considerably) but now I've done as much as I can. However, I did happen to notice that The Joe Perry Project page is incorrectly titled Joe Perry Project. I didn't want to attempt to resolve/move this (as I'm sure I'd get in a right so I thought maybe you might want to update your "To do" list ;) and resolve that one for us...K. Onward and upward!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:13, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Image display problem Edit

I just uploaded album art for Aerosmith:Pandora's Toys (1994) by following the 'upload' link on the album page and this was applied correctly. I come to apply this on the artist page and...yes, you guessed it - it isn't displaying correctly. I also happened to notice album art isn't displaying correctly on Santana's page either. (I didn't upload or apply those btw). Certainly very weird.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 15:08, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

I fixed the one for Aerosmith (I think there must be something wrong with the encoding when you copy and paste the image name). The Santana ones don't display because no one had uploaded the images yet. Hope that helps! --WillMak050389 16:23, 20 April 2008 (EDT)
Cheers Will! But since I just uploaded a load more on the Art Of Noise page and I don't want to keep hassling you/Keifer to correct these, can you tell me exactly how to correct these? Whilst it seems pretty weird as I've always copied and pasted file name after uploaded (seemed a bit silly to retype it) I think I had best type this afresh for now and hope this will result in correct display.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 16:36, 20 April 2008 (EDT)
It seems to have something to do with your pipe character " | ". Make sure you use the keyboard key for this (should be the shift character on the same key as forward slash). I tested replacing one of the images on that page by replacing the pipe character and the preview displayed the image. --WillMak050389 16:44, 20 April 2008 (EDT)
K Thanks Will. I shall go and give it a go now on the Art Of Noise page.
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 16:59, 20 April 2008 (EDT)
Sorry I didn't reply sooner. See, that's the good side of vandalism/spamming...all of us admins have each other's talk pages on watch to keep them somewhat protected, so if one of us doesn't get a message right away, usually somebody else will help out.
Art Of Noise, eh? Okay, it's official. You're my long-lost twin sister, aren't you? I think that's one of the earliest pages that I worked on. (Which also reminds me...I got that turntable up and working, pulled out two big boxes of albums, but no Queen, no Art of Noise, no Yes, no box of often-played albums is still lost. Grrrrrr.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:00, 20 April 2008 (EDT)
Spamming? lol..So if I understand correctly, to get a question answered quickly all I've got to do is spam your talk page with messages. K thanks for the tip, I shall remember that ;)
Now, on a more serious note, I just thought I would enlighten you and Will as to what I discovered (with your help) caused the display problem, so you can point someone in the right direction if anyone should ever report this problem again. K listening? Alright.
Well you see when I first came on here I began compiling a few notes for easy reference onto a text document. Then, when the occasion called for it, I would simply copy/paste the appropriate template, one of which being {{Album Art|<<Artist_Name>> - <<Album_Title_#1>>.jpg|<<Album Title #1>>}} onto the relevant page. That worked out fine and presented me with no problem. But of course that wasn't good enough for me (lol).
So then I thought to myself why don't I copy and paste the entire 'Help' manual (Ok..not really the whole onto a Word document? A good idea in theory yes, however it seems Word didn't like the 'pipe' symbol and although it tried very hard to confuse me and disguise what it had done by looking ok on the page, in actual fact it had changed this and therefore it wasn't a valid 'pipe' symbol at all. Wether this was caused by the font I was using I don't know. But that is my friends what caused this problem. Not me of course (no no no) but Microsoft. Old Bill certainly has a lot to answer for. Maybe I should tell him (hee hee).  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 08:19, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Worklist...(aka spam message no 1) Edit

You might want to look at my user page at some point Keifer, under the heading 'Pages off K's Worklist'. Well...when you're presented, like I often am, with time on your hands after the little people have gone to bed and hundreds of LyricWiki pages to choose from, it seems as good a place as any to start.

This having been said, I feel it's only fair I should warn you that I do deviate off every now and again (don't you and since I've never been one for doing what I was told (again, don't you know...hee hee), I'll only do what I want. But you admin have all been very helpful and encouraging to me since I first came on here (THANK YOU) (unlike some I could mention at Wikipedia...grrrrr), you all work so hard maintaining the site and doing stuff that I wouldn't have a clue how to do, I just want to do what I can to help.

However, if you deem any of these pages to be sacred and would rather I left them alone, please, just let me know. I won't be in the least offended. Besides which, I'm sure I can find a few hundred more pages in need of attention to do...hee hee.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 08:36, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

No problem dealing with the Kiefer work page - it's quite old. No sacred cows, anyway. I tend to more clean up messes, formatting errors, capitalization wackiness, vandalism, spamming, and the like, and on occasion when I see a page that needs serious help or is a major (or somewhat-major) artist with few or no albums listed, then I'll go into "project-mode". So, basically, those projects have been abandoned. (They probably need updating, really.) Many of those old projects are on my watchlist, so if anything completely wacky goes on, I'll see and correct.
We admins do try to be helpful - I'm probably the worst admin at writing notes that don't offend, though. Heck, even notes that I thought were cheerful and helpful have offended people! In such a setting as this, it's difficult to gauge how someone is going read something. So I usually try to be as factual and bland as possible, basically. Sometimes, however....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   13:14, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
Asia - As you know I uploaded album covers (very pretty, like the Yes covers) for all the albums on the page. Well now I have obtained all missing lyrics, removed 19 of the 23 songs from the 'Other songs' category and added release info for the remaining 4. So I think you can safely mark Asia off your worklist as finished. Oh yes, I have also flagged an album page Asia:The Collection (2000) for deletion.
On a slightly different note, I am glad Sean has finally got round to dealing with the message I think I left him back in February about the time settings being out. Only took him 3 months (hee hee) No, joking aside, I know he is a very busy guy. ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 18:23, 23 April 2008 (EDT)
Looks sweet. Roger Dean makes some beautiful album covers, indeed! I have the "Album Cover Album" by him and Hipgnosis (which did all the classic Floyd covers, among others). Absolutely great stuff. His stuff was (is) so popular, that other artists would copy his style on other album covers. I once had a book all about Dean's work (now that I look at the Roger Dean page at Wikipedia, it was "Views"). He did set design for a couple of stage performances, as I recall, that were equally cool and other-worldly, but in 3-D!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:18, 23 April 2008 (EDT)

Unofficial releases...(aka spam message no 2) Edit

What's the policy with regards to bootlegs? The reason I ask is because I was endeavouring to deal with the 'Other Songs' on The Sisters Of Mercy page and I have established that whilst they have never been officially released, most of them (if not all) appear on one particular bootleg.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 08:41, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

There's no official bootleg policy, but my thought is that as long as it is a case of just a few, then they're fine to add to the Artist page. Especially in this case, where some songs were performed live, but weren't on an official release. They should go under their own "Bootlegs" header, with the album's header having three equals signs instead of just two. I'll put the Sisters Of Mercy page on my watchlist, and I'll check it when you get things rearranged. You seem to be getting things pretty well now, so I don't foresee any problems!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   13:14, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
'You seem to be getting things pretty well now' Careful now, I might just interpret that to be praise ;)
And I do hope you have by now blown the dust off, listened to and enjoyed the excellent Pyramid album. But honestly, losing sight of your Yes and Beatles vinyls - shame on you!
Art of Noise? I've never really heard any of their stuff. Well when I say 'I've never really heard any of their stuff' I probably have...when I was throwing up behind a bush at a party because I had been stupid enough to drink half a bowl of someone's home-made punch (Oh those were the days)...but not as I would recall. Reckon I'd like?
Ok down to business. With regards to SOM, since the only songs presenting me with a problem are the ones in the 'Other Songs' category, I only intend to list the bootleg these are on. I believe, as I say, it's just the one. In view of this, do you still want me to create a seperate 'Bootleg' category with the album title as a sub-category within that? SOM probably have more bootleg albums than most bands I know, so of course there is always the possibility that more songs might surface in the future, but that having been said, I think most songs are already represented on the page.
And what is the right way to correct problems such as >> this?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:35, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
Yup, still use the Bootleg header, since it's not an official release. Hey, singles get treated the same respect!  :]
As for Art of Noise, check out the Wikipedia page and see if that intrigues you a little. Trevor Horn, 10cc, Yes, Godley & Creme, Buggles - if any of those are something you like, then.... Try here for a few samples of their work. (Moments in Love, Beatbox, Legs, & Peter Gunn Theme are good AoN examples - I hadn't heard Catwalk, although it's loading now and does sound like AoN - and the remix one might not be official AoN.) Their stuff is primarily instrumental, although the Tom Jones/AoN remake of Prince's falsetto hit masterpiece "Kiss" is gorgeously campy and yet played straighter than the original! Perhaps a bit of an acquired taste, it's a bit of a mix between electronic music and prog. rock. Even 20 years later, they still have a strong cult following. I recently found one of their early albums in a used CD store and the guy at the register was shocked that they had it.
As for the Asia page - it gets deleted. DONE! Woo-hoo, I finally got one.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:17, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
I'm real sorry to have to break this to you mate, but actually you're wrong. Because since I'm not admin, I can't actually delete a page. This being so, the jury's out and they have found in favour of me: verdict = Keifer's 'one' discounted (on grounds of unfairness). Assessment - "Keifer must try harder" (hee hee)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:10, 22 April 2008 (EDT)
Yes, but you could have placed a deletion request on the page, which would have counted. Hah-HAH! (Besides, the score how it is, it's not like I'm ever going to be able to catch up!)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:26, 22 April 2008 (EDT)
I told you I was good ;) On that note, and because I'm a female and we always have to have the last word (and since it's 4.21 a.m even for us insomniacs) I think I'd better go to bed! *Still laughing as she goes*  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:48, 22 April 2008 (EDT)

SOTD queue. Edit

I actually refilled it earlier today and forgot to remove that message. Sorry!
We are running low on nominations though if you're feeling inspired :)
-Sean Colombo (talk|contribs) 16:53, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

Soundtrack template... Edit

Okay Okay..I get it. I guess I best revisit the Dylan page rather sharpish 'cos I can almost feel you breathing down my neck (hee hee).  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 00:04, 26 April 2008 (EDT)

Phew!! Think I just about scraped in there in the nick of time (lol)...On a more serious note though, would it be at all possible, seeing as this is a 'soundtrack ' template, for someone to incorporate the word 'soundtrack' into the template? Like KingNee thought it was already (see my talk page). Because although these are all songs from soundtracks, some albums don't seem to want to include this wording in their title... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 00:19, 26 April 2008 (EDT)

Are you aware of this? Edit

A friend told me about this. Just wanted to bring it to your attention.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:36, 26 April 2008 (EDT)

Well that's annoying. I didn't know they spelled it like that in German. There's not much we can do though, that I know of (short of challenging their registration through ICANN). Hopefully they'll redirect to our site eventually (probably not since it's a roadblock now, they're probably just squatters).
Thanks for pointing it out,
-Sean Colombo (talk|contribs) 14:11, 26 April 2008 (EDT)
Sorry Sean, I gave you the wrong link (although admittedly still of interest). This is the one my friend saw . I haven't had a chance to look around there myself.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:17, 26 April 2008 (EDT)
Oh, yeah. They've actually been around for as long as we have (longer even - I didn't know about them until after I started writing this site though because they're hard to find). But they just set up a wiki and started adding stuff by hand (writing spiders & bots isn't easy), so they're still on around 30,000 songs. That means they've added 20,000 in the last 2 years if my math is correct.
I'm not sure why they're still doing it, but they're not hurting us (or pretending to be us) & they don't have popups either so whatever :) Plenty of room on the internet for both is my opinion.
-Sean Colombo (talk|contribs) 22:33, 26 April 2008 (EDT)

Moving Mountains Edit

Hey! I saw you changed the artist page for Moving Mountains, and I'm not sure you caught all the details. I meant "(Demo)" as a format-related tag, just like "(EP)". If the self-titled demo had been released, it would indeed have been an EP (like most demos). In any case, it's not an album. The problem with the song titles is that three of the songs on the demo were re-recorded under the same name for the album, of which at least two (I'm unsure about Alastika) have different lyrics. That is why I added the suffix to those links.

I just think all the notes look odd, and they really obscure the fact that the release is a demo. Based on how the page looks, you would think that the band first recorded a demo, then released a self-titled album with three songs from the demo, and three fresh ones. So I like my version better. There are a bunch of examples of demos, most of which use a similar style that I did. Or do you plan to standardize according to yours?

Escapist 08:35, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

The site standard is to have add-ons used only when absolutely necessary. LW:PN probably needs to be updated to spell this out better, though, I must admit. It talks about add-ons for Song pages, but not for Artists or Albums. It's the same principle, however. So, unless (Demo) or (Live) or (EP) was part of the official title for an album, then such an add-on should not be used unless an album of the same title was released that same year. (In the case where EP is a part of the official title, however, I have yet to see the addition contained within parenthesis...could happen, though.) A note below the link to explain that an album is a demo album (as I did on that page) is appropriate, however.
If you wish to remove the notes of explanation beside the three early song versions, then feel free to do so. They are primarily there to distinguish that version from the later versions. Another acceptable way to deal with them is to add the (Demo) add-on to the visual part of the link.
If this wasn't, as you say, released, then this isn't technically even an album that should be listed, but instead the songs should be placed under an "Other Songs" header with notations as to their origins. If it was released for general consumption (I know some artists sell such things at performances), then it is fine as is.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   09:02, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

The 'Help' Manual... Edit

In view of djp's efforts, I think some words need to be added to this section to limit it to 6 releases..Agreed..?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:02, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Limit the number of albums listed? How would we choose what 6?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 15:37, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
Mmmmm, good point KingNee.But the reason why I thought this might be a good idea was because as it stands at present it results in extremely long song pages like this...  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 16:06, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
I saw that, so I know what you mean. I would say that there is no best way to go about this one, but losing that information would be worse than having too much.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 17:27, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
I was trying to think of a solution for this also. Possibly something utilizing a "[show]/[hide]" option? Or, in extreme cases such as these, just provide a list instead of using {{Song}} for each album. --WillMak050389 18:48, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
Losing that information isn't a bad thing. Listing every small-press compilation? DVDs? Those lists are total overkill. Overwhelming and huge to the point of being functionally useless, really. The links are supposed to be helpful to guide a person to the song's albums, but on such a list, it's like finding a needle in a haystack. 6 is an arbitrary number, but 40+? That's insanity. (And usually I'm a fan....  :-] )    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:03, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
While I was commenting out the extra links in the America songs I came up with this idea. Why not have a "Also appears in.." template below the lyrics? It would look like this:
This song is performed by Some Band and appears on the album Their One And Only Hit (1975).
This song also appears on the album More One And Only Hits (2000).
((Song Footer))
What d'ya think?
Djp 18:01, 11 May 2008 (EDT)
P.S.: Can someone scan the database and replace & amp;quot; (no space between the '&' and 'amp;') with a double-quote?
I think that's a good compromise. We would need to create a template for below the main Song templates linking to the secondary ==Complete Album Appearances== list (it could be a hard-wired link, however, something like: [[Artist_Name#Complete_Album_Appearances|...More...]]), and then the albums could just be a bulleted list. Satisfies the completist in all of us, but doesn't bog down the top...! Nice solution.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   11:45, 12 May 2008 (EDT)
Great! OK! What's the ETA on that?
Djp 14:23, 13 May 2008 (EDT)
I'm not a good template maker. (So by "we", I meant someone else.  :-] ) I would hardwire them, as a cut-and-paste on each page isn't much more difficult than using a template anyhow. Although my hard-wiring sample above was also in error, since it has to go on the Song page. So it should be [[Artist_Name:Song_Title#Complete_Album_Appearances|...More...]] .    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:21, 13 May 2008 (EDT)
Ok. So who should I bug the hell out of?
Djp 22:15, 14 May 2008 (EDT)
User:Teknomunk possibly, although he's been super busy for a while.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:41, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Soundtrack titles Edit

Keifer, I'm a little unsure how to name soundtrack albums, you know 'part of the official title' and all. I'd therefore be grateful if you could look at this and tell me how you would name that particular album.

I mean is the 'official title' for that album Original Soundtrack & Music From The Film The Good Thief? Or is it The Good Thief (Soundtrack), The Good Thief (Original Soundtrack), The Good Thief (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack), or is it simply The Good Thief?

I'm also considering in this the external links, which are generally of course just the film name. Incidentally, this album relates to the one song, I repeat one song remaining on Bono's page, i.e. "That's Life" (Yeah, okay, okay, not much of an achievement admittedly, since all I actually needed to do was redirect them all to U2) I'd certainly appreciate it if you could give me some direction on this.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 18:26, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

From that picture, I'd say "Original Soundtrack & Music From The Film The Good Thief", but Google doesn't have any links that match that. So "The Good Thief" is equally likely, I suppose. (You wouldn't happen to have a copy of the album would you?) Often times when stuff like "Original Soundtrack & Music From" is in very close proximity to the title of the movie, then it is included, from what I've seen. When it's near a border (top or bottom, usually), it usually isn't. But I'm sure there are exceptions to any of these. Generalities, unfortunately. Soundtracks are a pain in the butt. Most sites like adding (Soundtrack) or (Original Soundtrack) if there's an "unoriginal" soundtrack... or (OST) least that's nice and succinct..., but that's normally just a convenience of labeling. (Once again, generalities and I certainly have no proof.) When all else fails, and you can't decide between two options, go with what Wikipedia has. They may be wrong, but if so, then somebody will eventually move the soundtrack to its correct location. (Oh, that was a bunch of nothing, wasn't it. *sigh* My apologies, it's late - I was staying up working on a project.)
OK, so no wrong/right answers then. Like you, it seems, I tend to go with the prominence of the wording on the album cover (lol@unoriginal soundtrack). And no sorry I'm not much of a film buff, so about the only soundtrack albums I've got are basically The Who's Quadrophenia and Tommy. Oh, and of course this one (lol).  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 05:15, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
Albums for musicals are even more of a pain, though. Do songs from musicals get attributed to the musical (Grease, for example), to the Cast of the musical (High School Musical), to the composer (Andrew Lloyd Webber), or to the individual artists who sung the songs (I think the Sweeney Todd movie page is like that, as is Moulin Rouge and Across The Universe)?
I have similar problems as this when tagging my music (which of course I'm equally obsessive about getting 'right'). I tend always to go with attributing the songs to the performing artist/s (if known) and the album I categorise under Various Artists. Instrumental soundtracks however always present me with a problem, since these are generally released simply under the composer's name. As I'm sure you know, it is very rare for the actual orchestra to be credited. This being so, it is extremely difficult trying to establish the same.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 05:15, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
As for the Bono song, it's a Bono song, apparently, and not a U2 song. Leave it there, I guess, and give a note linking to the album's page, I guess. (He also did "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" for Across The Universe - Original Movie Soundtrack (2007), as a solo artist, too.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:45, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
'As for the Bono song, it's a Bono song, apparently, and not a U2 song. Leave it there..'. Yes, you were tired weren't you? lol. That's why, after I had finished redirecting all the other tracks, he was left a lonely little song :-( but no worries 'cos he's got some company now look :-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 05:15, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
Awwwwwwwwww, it has a buddy...! (It's nearly 5:30 here. I'm a bit blurry-eyed. Don't have to do work today, though, so sleepy-time in an hour or so.)
BTW, I noticed that you liked Whitesnake. My friends and I used to call Whitesnake the best of the "W" bands. Generally, a derisive term that we had for the group of big-hair pseudo-hard rock/metal bands of the 80s. White Lion, Winger, Warrant, and I forget who else. W.A.S.P., I think, maybe Wham! & Willie Nelson???! Anyhow, just thought I'd share....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   05:28, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
The content of a lot of their songs is very sexist, but Whitesnake sure made some great music in the 80's. (They were great live too). Sleep well ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 06:45, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

Smashing Pumpkins move Edit

Hi! Haha, yeah, thank goodness for Firefox and it's tabbed browsing... It still did take me a while. I've been thinking about doing it for a while, and today I had nothing to do, so I thought, "RIGHT! I'm going to sort out that LyricWiki page!" Ha. So nerdy of me. Sorry, I did contemplate putting it up for discussion, but I could see that the discussion activity seemed to be next to nothing, so I thought I'd just go right ahead and do it. Plus, I thought that if anyone had a problem with it, they'd be a HUGE bastard to revert it all. And I can see then, that you're not a bastard! Lol... If it's not too much trouble, would you mind moving the rest? The next controversial names I want to tackle are MACHINA II's song titles... Pasta of Muppets 06:28, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

Important NewsEdit

Today is the day of the first anniversary of Bruce Springsteen's Born to Run as the Song Of The Day.
Hornean 12:34, 5 May 2008 (EDT)


Robert, I'm really sorry for my behavior. You were trying to help me. I apologize for caring too much about Sean. Can you forgive me?
Hornean 15:27, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

Uh, sure. 'Specially since I have no idea what you are referring to.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   15:03, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

O.C. SupertonesEdit

Hey, you totally saved me from a big project there. I fixed a couple of things to find out that the whole batch was pretty borked, and said, "Crap, I will come back to this when I have some time." Then you fixed the whole thing right out from under me.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 03:53, 9 May 2008 (EDT)

He's a very helpful guy is what I always say..hee hee  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 10:17, 9 May 2008 (EDT)
You know, I figured you were going to come back to it when you returned to the site, but my anal-retentive side went into red alert/overdrive when I saw that page partially fixed and I just couldn't help myself. Bad links, missing release dates...pages with both album listings AND LYRICS!!...NOT IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER!!!!!! *****AAAAaaaaAaAaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!***** There's only so much a guy can handle.... :-] To make it up to ya, Newsboys has some of the same issues...!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   15:13, 9 May 2008 (EDT)
I see what you mean about Newsboys. However, I hope that I never again see an album listing and a song on the same page again. That one scared me a little. (and before we get into "well, my OCD's are cooler..." I am just going to walk away, right after I say that my OCD's are cooler.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 19:56, 9 May 2008 (EDT)
By the way, I hate blanked pages, and I have been seeing them a lot. What do you think about setting something up server-side that sets a flag, or tells the user that blanking is not an option. Too invasive?
I have this working on my test server, I'm committing it to subversion so that Sean can get it on the server.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 22:27, 9 May 2008 (EDT)
Sweet! How does it do it? Automatically revert blanking (most common, from what I've seen)?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 22:49, 9 May 2008 (EDT)
What it does is it doesn't let the user save the page if it is blank and gives instructions on deletion and refers them to us if they have any questions. The pages already blanked will unfortunatly remain that way until fixed.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 23:52, 9 May 2008 (EDT)
No problem, Special:Shortpages tells me that there are none right now (I think I took care of them all). Does it work right now, or is there an update required first?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 00:31, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
It is not active right now, Sean will have to update the server before it does.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 06:14, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
See, Special:Shortpages is something I never explored. So many things that probably need a bit of clean up on that list. I really should explore the Special pages again some time.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:39, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
Special:Shortpages is a little hard to wade through. By now, most of them are just short artist pages that are otherwise fine. If you want a good, infinite listing, there is Special:Ancientpages, which lists every page from oldest 'last edit' date to newest. Catch is that all of the pages that far back are before formatting solidified for LW. Personally, these specialpages lists (like my campaign against Special:Deadendpages) are my favorite, because you can just march from one end of the list to the other, and when you are done, you are done (no matter how long it takes).
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 01:59, 11 May 2008 (EDT)

Wouldn't it be great if.... Edit

..after creating an album page, all those pesky little song pages listed in the 'Other Songs' category were automatically linked to the same? By which I mean without us having to enter this information manually. It would certainly make dealing with horrendously long 'Other Songs' lists, such as the 727 errant songs currently detailed on Frankie boy's page, one hell of a lot easier (to say the least).

In view of this, do you reckon your friend Uber could do this for you? I mean, he obviously thinks very highly of you, in view of the frequency with which he selects your nominations as 'Song of the Day' - Dear Kiefer, I am extremely pleased to advise that your song has once again won Song of the Day. Lots of love, your loyal and ever dependable friend, Uberbot xx  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:00, 11 May 2008 (EDT)

Do you mean that the used songs were automatically removed from the Other Songs list? If so, then there's almost an automatic method. Build a handful of album listings and then when you're done for the day, remove the Other Songs listings. The Janitor will come around and re-assemble the list, minus the used songs. Sometimes it doesn't do the whole list in alphabetical order and instead breaks in into a couple of alphabetical chunks, but any pages that are no longer orphans will not be included. I do this on occasion, and it's a time saver.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   11:31, 12 May 2008 (EDT)
Hee hee we are more alike than you know! I just wasn't exactly sure, what with you being a teacher and all, if I'd be sent to the Head for doing it ;)
UPDATE - Well last night, if my calculations based on the 'orphaned page' list is correct, it got rid of around 159 of the little blighters ;). Only another 568 to go... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 06:19, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Whilst you may have hoped... Edit can see from this post that I wasn't lost for words...(hee hee). Seriously, thank you Keifer. And indeed for this Redxx. As I indicated to Sean, I feel I still have much to learn, but I will endeavour to do my best to promote LyricWiki and also to not let you down.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 11:35, 13 May 2008 (EDT)

Caps Edit

I can respect the caps guideline, but it's not proper English to capitalize articles, conjuctions & prepositions. In my personal opinion, I think the caps guideline should be changed. LilAlexthaRapper 21:20, 13 May 2008 (EDT)

Letting You KnowEdit

Last June, I was thinking of nominating Bruce Springsteen's Blinded By The Light. But the version didn't perform well and didn't peak on the charts. So I decided to change my thought by nominating Manfred Mann's version of that song which attained its greatest success when it reached #1 on the Hot 100 in 1977. Gladly, it this version won the SOTD on July 19, 2007. Hornean 01:58, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Manfred's is da best version..Good nomination..great song... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words

Vinyl Records Edit

I know you was just dying to copy me in using the <OL START=> </OL>command (impressed huh?), but honestly..!!
"What?" I hear you say? Well, you of all people should know that on vinyls, tracks are numbered on each side from 1! This being so, would you please explain yourself with regards to this Frank Sinatra:A Swingin' Affair! (1957)..
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 07:09, 14 May 2008 (EDT)
*goes off mumbling: "I dunno.." (and probably "men") whilst shaking head* (and tutting)

Hey, all I know is that the bonus track was suddenly #16. #1, perhaps, but #16? Where's #9-15???? I was just...well...nevermind. *sigh* I'll be going now. ;-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   08:55, 14 May 2008 (EDT)
You do so make me laugh! Ok, I'll let you off. It was partly my fault anyway, as after I posted this message I happened to notice that on some of the other album pages I have created for Frankie boy, I had made very clear at the top of the page that the first tracklisting related to an LP record. And why, you may well ask, did I feel the need to do this for albums recorded before 1982? Well...(put your shell-like a bit closer to the screen)..I know you're going to find this somewhat difficult to believe, but because there are still some people out there who think CD's were actually a recording format in the 1950's (*inane grin*). That is of course why the 'bonus track' on the Cd is #16. Because indeed it is (hee hee)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 10:45, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Iced Earth Edit

Hey Kiefer,

I asked someone with the CD and it is indeed spelt "Jekyll & Hyde" does this warrant a change on lyric wiki now? Just asking for the go ahead so I don't do wrong. David_VI 11:46, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Sounds like concrete proof to me. If you could, would you make a note of this on the discussion page, both for the artist and for the album? Thanks! (I'm kind of curious where the discrepancy came into play. Seems sort of wide-spread, doesn't it? Weird.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:01, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

KanYe West Edit

Actually, his official website says otherwise. LilAlexthaRapper 13:13, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

But it doesn't. It uses it stylistically, but the capital Y is not officially part of his name. See for his site-exclusive book that he's promoting. The author info has his name as "Kanye West." See here, which is the Amazon listing for the book that he wrote with his mom, entitled "Raising Kanye: Life Lessons from the Mother of a Hip-Hop Superstar". See the copyright notice on his website, it states: "Kanye West/Mascotte Holdings, LLC. All Rights Reserved." Here's the Google News search for "KanYe": Not a single capitalized Y in all of the articles on that page. Here's a picture of an autograph of his. Once again, no capital Y. The capitalized Y is just not an official part of his name. If you find some sort of proof (an interview or something) where he says that the capital is official (I've Googled and search for the past hour+ and can find absolutely nothing to support your claim), then post it on Talk:Kanye West for discussion, and then appropriate steps can be taken.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:54, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

"To Do" lists... Edit

Thought you might find this exchange of posts interesting >>> Bowie  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:59, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

My to-do list has a freakin' life of its own!  :-O (Should I add more to it?)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:59, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
Exuse my interference, but if i'm right and Queen is indeed your, Kiefer, favorite group, then primary job in that page should be clean-up from garbage of non-Queen songs, having only some relation to Queen. E.g., 'Other Songs' section contains all songs from album 'Shove It', released in 1988 by group The Cross, founded by Queen drummer Roger Taylor. And though Freddie and some other Queen members had contributed to some (not all) songs in this album, definitelly it can not be treated as Queen album.
You may ask me why I'm talking here about that instead of cleaning it out myself ;)
First of all, I'm not sure if my understanding is legitimate (as an example I can point you to page Grinderman i made; and I'm still not sure if I was right making separate page for the group, where all members are from Nick_Cave_and_The_Bad_Seeds).
Second, with all my respect (if not love) to lyricwiki, I must say that interface of making such changes is (to put it mildly) far from perfection ;) I did tried to understand what for must I repeat (manually!) listing of songs in album page after I've entered all this list in artist page - but couldn't - it's still a puzzle for me... That's why I'm so eager, waiting for a day when Sean make his SOAP WS to work...
regards, --Senvaikis 08:09, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
Ah, the wonderful olden days of tinkering on the Queen page...I remember it well. Now I slap down spammers, shuffle and file pages in their correctly pagenamed locations, and update the occasional template with album information or such. Rather boring stuff, I must say. But the torch from so long ago continues to be carried on by wonderful people such as yourself and Redxx.  :-]
On the more serious side, however, you're doing a marvelous job, from what I can see. Duplicating work from Artist page to album page is a bit of a hassle, I'll admit, but copy-and-paste is your friend. I update album pages quite often, so it's not much of a problem...well, for me, anyhow. Best wishes -    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   12:40, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
Yeah..reckon...because every now and again, as has been proved, you are going to get a user who maybe appreciates that as an admin you've got your work cut out and can't devote as much time and attention to such pages as when you compiled the list. Whilst I can't of course speak for our friend Senvaikis, this was in fact the basis for me dealing with those pages off your list. Of course my list is more prominent, so any pages I put on my list are likely to get more attention. My list is also updated. As indeed is;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:33, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
You are completely sick.
Which is why we like you. and, yes, fear you.
Kick some more butt for a while, I'm taking a to ya later!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   13:38, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
Redxx: yep, you are completelly sick; but how prettily...:)
Kiefer: your kindly-diplomatic reply I understand as silent approval for some brush up of Queen page :)
Speaking about 'copy-paste', let me disagree: of course, it's not a problem, when we speak about 1-2 pages... But being a programmer, I'd rather spend a month creating some intelligent and user-friendly tool for such manual job, even if job itself requires half an hour. Especially knowing that this job will be multiplied by thousands... :) Ok, leave this question - I dont want to fall into disrepute of an old grumbler (I suspect I have allready such reputation, if you ask Sean ;))
Anyway, I'd like to thank both you and Redxx for your kind words and all your team for spirit of kindness and job you are doing. --Senvaikis 14:52, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
If you know how to program a bot to compare album page track listings to what is one the Artist page, that would be great. I think being able to sic it on specific artist pages, as opposed to site-wide, would be best, and then marking those album pages that have discrepancies would be the way to go, allowing for human eyes to compare and judge which list is "better."    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:47, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Pesky Underscores Edit

The templates replace spaces with the underscore '_' character like this...

# '''[[<<Artist_Name>>:<<Song_One>>|<<Song One>>]]'''

in Artist_Name and Song_One. I see a lot of code without the underscore. Is it mandatory?
Djp 20:47, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

No, it used to be, I guess, but now the underscores are automatically filled in if they are absent. It's easier to read and edit a page without them, in my opinion, but one can do it either way. I don't go crazy switching from one way to another. If there was a preferred way, some bot would go around cleaning things up, I guess. (In fact, I believe that one of the other users uses a program to automatically remove underscores from pages that they edit. Once again, just their personal preference, not site policy.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:41, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
I would argue, for the sake of ease of editing, that the better choice is without. I have noticed that the underscores are going a bit the way of the dodo. I mean, it is easier to read This Is An Artist:This Is A Song Name than This_Is_An_Artist:This_Is_A_Song_Name and a lot quicker to type, to boot
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 00:28, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
I agree with KingNee. I usually remove them.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 06:54, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
Okay, people, what part of "It's easier to read and edit a page without them, in my opinion..." was unclear? Yeesh! :-] (But there's nothing wrong with having them....) Some people go all anal-retentive and add them, some people go obsessive-compulsive and remove them. Po-tay-to, po-tah-to. While I am all in favor of compulsive/anal-retentive behavior in regards to organization, this is not a pet peeve that I share. I prefer to spend my time adding apostrophes to words like playin' and bustin' in rap songs and country songs. To each his (or her) own!  ;-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   07:17, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
I'm not even going to line up King_Nee's signature with his comment, I'm so non-compulsive! Woo-hoo! who's gonna do it...who's gonna do it...?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   07:22, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
I will.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 13:15, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
Haa Haa Haa..well in which case I'll get the one that escaped a bit further up ^^^^  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 16:44, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
Well, that's just great. Now I have to take out all those finely crafted "SUBSTITUTE()" functions in my Excel spreadsheet.
   Djp    my talk  •  my contributions  •  Rorschach for President     20:22, 16 May 2008 (EDT)


I've been monkeying around with the artist footer, and wanted to see what you thought.
Take a look at User:Kingnee1114lyrics/Sandbox/Testartist for some test cases.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 21:35, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

They look good. I tested a few more iterations and it seems to work fine. Perhaps test it on a "real" page and see how it handles?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:38, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
Looks great. Useful links to good sources.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:15, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
Things were looking great until I noticed All Music Guide hates 'The's and breaks. Working on it...
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 23:30, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
Question - could you possibly incorporate/add a Wikipedia link to the album (and maybe also the Song) template? It wouldn't half save me one hell of a lot of time... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 10:43, 17 May 2008 (EDT)
I can look into it. Right now I am still trying to figure this AMG thing out.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 11:12, 17 May 2008 (EDT)
Thanks KingNee, I would be grateful.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 08:50, 19 May 2008 (EDT)
Question: Where do we want the wikipedia link, and what should it look like on the album page? More visible is the wikipedia box, the way we do things now, but it can be a line in the album footer.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 14:49, 19 May 2008 (EDT)
Aah...ok. I hadn't thought of that (losing the box I mean). No, I wouldn't want to lose the box. It's just that it gets a bit monotonous, when you are doing a whole lot of albums, manually inserting the Wikipedia template onto every album page. It can also prove very time consuming mucking about with it's placement to locate exactly where it looks best on the page (such as when there are subsections/alternative cover art, etc.) Seeing as there is a link to Amazon (and now of course MusicBrainz), I just thought it'd be a great idea if the Wikipedia link was automatically built into the album template, not in the footer, but in the actual album page itself (like exists at present with the album tracklisting/footer/header).  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:27, 19 May 2008 (EDT)
P.S. Oh and before I forget, could someone please explain the red exclamation marks that are now in my settings, as I hadn't noticed them before becoming an admin. Thank you. x
Those are unpatrolled changes. I try to mark those that I visit as patrolled, so that other admins know that I've checked the page for spam & vandalism. For new items, the link is at the bottom of the page, for changes, you have to choose the "diff" link and then it has a "Mark as patrolled" link above where it shows the changes.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:51, 19 May 2008 (EDT)
K. Got that now. Thank-you ♫Яєdxx Actions Words

Todo list, hard work, mess & surrender... Edit

Hi, Kiefer

Instead of being proud after almost full cleaning of huge Jethro Tull OS list, ...I'm givin' up...

Worked hardly for several days with only one position in your todo list... And when my nightmare work seemed to come to the end, I realised that some albums and songs aren't visible to REST API search... Now I understand that I made some mess here, - making subdisks and subtracks, misusing columns, maybe something else...

Of course, I'd clean-up all this mess myself, but for two reasons I 'd like to ask for your help in that:

  • First reason - I've spent too much time with all that and now have a heap of must-to-do tasks accumulated in my 'real life'.
  • Second - truth to tell, I don't know what is the best or 'official' naming police for box sets (like 20/25 anniversary, etc) or such 'complicated' releases, as Passion Play, having several splitting into tracks/naming variants.

So, could you please take a look and finish 'polishing' of this page of group we both like? Anyway, the bulk of donkeywork is done (i hope) ;)

Regards, --Senvaikis 14:43, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

I took a stab at a few things, is there anything else specifically that you would like me to look at on that page?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:34, 19 May 2008 (EDT)


I updated AlbumFooter a little today, so I was hoping I could get everybody to keep an eye out for hiccups. Mainly, now the footer accepts |musicbrainz = and nothing else should be wrong.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 16:01, 19 May 2008 (EDT)


My dad has got the cassette entitled Enya and on its cover the titles of those songs have the format "TO GO BEYOND (I)" and "TO GO BEYOND (II)".

The same title format we can also see e.g. here:

The lyrics on Lyricwiki, on another websites, and on the recordings don't differ from each other very much. But there are sometimes some little but meaningful errors e.g. from Enya's "Anywhere Is" song

"It all seems to surprising" or "No Vega, no Orion"

as it was on Lyricwiki before (we can catch what she sings). I think the official website of an artist is one of the most credible and reliable sources for getting the lyrics. :)
Matman from Lublin 10:00, 23 May 2008 (EDT)

You'd think they'd be, but often time the "official" lyrics are different than how they were recorded. They're often really good for "What did she say there?" type stuff, but they'll leave off something like a lead-in "Well," to a phrase that was added when the song was actually recorded, or the phrasing will be tweaked a bit. (A little lyric nip-and-tuck, I guess.) They also often leave off repeated choruses or phrases. This site is a bit obsessive about matching the lyrics to the actual recording.
Good news about matching the tape, though. I had a feeling that was the case, as that format [(I) and (II)] is a bit more unusual than the one that Wikipedia and Amazon had, and it's good to know for sure!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:14, 23 May 2008 (EDT)

Keane Singles Edit

Well, I'd really like to thank your help editing all those singles' pages from Keane cds. I'm just starting here (I've made some corrections on the wikipedia, just some spelling problems or so), and I didn't know how to make the correct links and all that stuff, so I tried to copy the style from the Coldplay page =P

BTW, I've just changed the links for the singles pages in the Keane page, so all those redirections disappeared =D

Greets form Santiago, Chile, and sorry if my English isn't perfect (I'm just 17)



Brand new from King_Nee Labs: A (mostly) empty list of dead end pages, which is awesome. However, more appear every week, so if you want to help (and this is open to any of the admin), check it out once in a while to clear it again. I would have been happier to get the list to go to zero for OCD reasons, but sadly, Crossdomain.xml and kill that for me. Anyway, just wanted to let others know
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 00:02, 31 May 2008 (EDT)

Haa haa Ok I'll have a butchers as I'm Sinatra'd out atm (lol). Talking of which, I would be grateful for some ideas on where to go with this page Frank Sinatra: The Sixties (1960-1969), for as you can see, although the whole purpose of this page was to reduce the size of main artist page, this page is now oversized (due of course to all my hard earned efforts). Considering there is at least 4 more albums to go on this page, if you were me, would you split it into 2/3 e.g...1960-1963, 1964-1967, etc...or..?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 18:11, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
I don't think the page is horribly long. Long, but not more than, say, the Queen page.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:32, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
Ty. Reckon the section links are Ok like that? I can't think of a better way to arrange page... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:40, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
Section links? You mean "The Sixties", etc. or the album listing at the top?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:45, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
the album listing at the top  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:39, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
I was originally going to comment that the list wasn't necessary, but then I realized that you probably added that list so that you wouldn't have to have the Table of Contents, which, because you noted which songs were on which side of the album, would be extraordinarily long. I can't think of a smoother way to do it....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:51, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

The wonderfully coiffured Brian May Edit

K I got a bit of a problem on this page which I've not been able to resolve. It's a bit difficult to explain but you need to look at it in edit mode and it's this bit here Brian_May#Live_At_The_Brixton_Academy (1994).
As you can see from the artist page, I have in fact created song pages for all the songs on that particular album (under the name of The Brian May Band). I manually inserted the artist name/release instead of using the song template to get it to show the attributed artist correctly on song page as 'The Brian May Band'. However, when you click on a song link from the artist page it is presenting incorrectly as 'nothing on page/page does not exist'...all, that is, apart from the very first song. If I could only work out why the first song is OK, then I would probably have been able to create a work around for all this myself, but no matter how long I stare at the page (lol) I can't see what's so different about that particular song page.....Then of course we have the album page/s to deal with (2 created in trying to resolve all this - one in name of Brian May, the other The Brian May Band).
Yes, I've got into a right old pickle on this one 'tis true. Your help in sorting this out would therefore be very much appreciated.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 11:11, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

I beg your pardon for intervation, but seems to me it's the same (server replication) problem we have had resently. I've run into similar problems today too. --Senvaikis 13:34, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
Yes, I agree, weird things have been definitely been going on here today (e.g. pages taking ages to load, page not updating upon refresh, no effect upon saving edit, etc.). I also saw your page of code and I've seen that too today in dealing with this page. However, whatever is causing those problems isn't the total explanation for my particular problem, since I know that what I'm trying to do here is something a little unorthodox. That having been said, all the not updating type problems have certainly made it more difficult for me to see my way through to resolving my problem with this page.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 14:35, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
Something was going on today. Sean and I were bouncing e-mails back and forth earlier in the day trying to figure things out. (Me searching for symptoms, him trying to diagnose the problem.) There's some info on the blog (the link is on the LyricWiki:Community Portal page) about some of the difficulties today. Unfortunately, it appears as if a 7-8 hour period of changes may have been lost or didn't register. The joys of technology.... Whenever you notice pages not updating upon saving or refreshing, it's time to e-mail Sean with what you're noticing and take a bit of a break, I'm afraid.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:51, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
Yes, yes, yes, that's all good and well but what Brian wants to know is does his hair look good on the cover of Live At The Brixton Academy? And if not, will that album have to go on a separate 'The Brian May Band' page? (He reckons it'd be a damn shame if that was to be the case) ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:25, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
P.S. Btw that artist I did the Wikipedia page about, Gerard McMahon, (now known as G Tom Mac), the guy who wrote/recorded Cry Little Sister, the theme song for The Lost Boys soundtrack, offered me a job.
As always, excellently styled, and outrageously huge hair. (Did you get the pic from Wikipedia? If not, the pic there looks a bit more sharp.) It appears as though the "band" was basically just a way for him to play his solo (and Queen) stuff live. I'd put a redirect at "The Brian May Band" to the album location on the "Brian May" page. It's a one-time thing, and it's of primary interest to Brian May fans. Unless you think that there are "The Brian May Band" fans out there who don't like "Brian May" stuff...?  ;-] And congrats on the new job! You rock!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:39, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

A Favor?Edit

From User_talk:Kingnee1114lyrics

Would you mind doing me a huuuuge favor the next time you visit the Template:Artist page? Could you update the instructions there a little bit? I figure since you've been tinkering with it that you probably know it the best, so I figured 'Go to the source!' The example given is old and doesn't show the formatting for all the new cool stuff that's been added. Thanks a million!

It's practically done already! Is there anything that you hope I'd include, specifically?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 00:32, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Currently, the optional parameters (pedlr, myspace, etc.) aren't included in the examples on the page (well, artist is, but only that one). If those could be added to the example so that people could see what format the information should be in for the links to work, that would be great. (Most newbies like to put the "http://www"-type stuff in the links.) Thanks!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   11:44, 5 June 2008 (EDT)


From User:Hornean

The Main Page and the Song of The Day page is suffering a glitch. Can you and the other administrators fix the problem?

It's major problem affecting all parts of the site, but Sean is dealing with it so hopefully it will be sorted out very soon.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 09:17, 7 June 2008 (EDT) << who had 1 nomination for S.O.T.D.
See I told you he'd sort it! And thanks Hornean for this >> [1] Talking of SOTD, I take it you do know that ÜB is Keifer's best bud? Look here's the proof SOTD notification
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 07:04, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Jerry Hadley, Sissel, Brian May And Just William:Il Colosso Edit

This song (currently on Brian's page) presented me with difficulty, so could you take a butchers at it when you got a mo and amend as necessary please? I wasn't quite sure how best to deal with it as you can see. Thank you  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 19:10, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Not bad. Nothing that gets my obsessive-compulsive sirens a-blarin', anyway.  ;-] I touched it up a little, but nothing major, just cosmetics.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:27, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Lame experimenter SOS Edit

Hi, Kiefer,

I need your help after some lame experiments trying to change my default signature. Just wanted to change link from non-existing User:Senvaikis to existing User_talk:Senvaikis pursuant to your detailed explanation in discussion with Redxx. I made sig & sigtemp pages according to your instructions, put {{sigtemp}} into nickname field in my prefs, but it didn't work... I used to make several unsuccessful attempts until realised that perhaps this technique requires obligatory userpage existence. Then I created it just for testing, and found that sig template 'came alive'. But after my lame experiments prefs page now contained wrong nick value (sig instead of sigtemp). And when I tried to open my prefs page, I got this:

The requested URL could not be retrieved

While trying to retrieve the URL:

The following error was encountered:

    * Zero Sized Reply 

Squid did not receive any data for this request.

Your cache administrator is root.
Generated Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:02:52 GMT by (squid/2.6.STABLE6) 

So, now I'm unable to restore my preferences and even to sign normaly this post...:) Please, help me to restore access to my prefs; thank you in advance and sorry for obstruction --{{User:Senvaikis/Signature}} 06:37, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Don't know if someone fixed my preferences page, but now it's available again. But I still need your help - now I'm sure I've missed something in aforementioned your discussion...:) Seems to me it's impossible at all without your kindly assistance :)--{{User:Senvaikis/Signaturetemp}} 11:45, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
Hey there Senvaikis, I can help with this. With everything set up as you have it, I think the last step would be to put {{SUBST:User:Senvaikis/Signaturetemp}} into the preferences page and check the box for 'Raw Signature'. That should do the trick.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 13:06, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
Thanks a lot, Kiefer; I was right choosing you for help :) --Senvaikis (talk) 14:14, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
But now you can see what my next question will be about: - what's about the date stamp in signature? --Senvaikis (talk) 14:18, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
That was the result of an extra carriage return in User:Senvaikis/Signature. I have been putting some thought to this, and I want to ask if you are planning to make this signature more, or are just intending on keeping it as it is. The reason I ask is that templates as signatures are more or less a last ditch effort to keep the code on a page simple, and should be avoided, especially if the code of the signature (User_talk:Senvaikis) is shorter than the template name {{User:Senvaikis/Signature}}.
So, I would say this: design what you want for a signature, and if it comes to be less than 2 lines of code, just put that into your signature space on Special:Preferences, as well as keeping Raw Signature checked.
And if you have any questions, please feel free to ask.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 15:51, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
Thanks! You are striking and quick as lightning... Btw, it happens to me often too - sometimes it's easier to make someone's job than explain how it should be done ;)--Senvaikis (talk) 16:01, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
I'm not going (at least now) to use any Redxx-style 'beauties' - just split my signature into user_ and talk_page links. If you can suggest some less expensive way of doing that - let me know. Thanks once more, --Senvaikis (talk) 16:13, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
Sory for tardy response - only now I realized that you've answered to my question allready; forgive me, heavy minded oldman...--Senvaikis (talk) 16:28, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
Hey, no problem. Believe me, it took me a while to figure out how to get it to work the first time. You have the benefit of knowing someone to ask about it. I do want to apologize that you finally got it all working, just to recommend that you do things differently. I don't want to seem like a killjoy.
Good luck, and have fun
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 19:30, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Hamill Claire:The Moon Is A Powerful Lover Edit

You removed a space after the colon in "Hamill Claire:The Moon Is A Powerful Lover " Hamill_Claire:The_Moon_Is_A_Powerful_Lover, but why? In English, the grammatical rule is to leave a space after a colon, so I don't get your edit. Plse restore or explain? :)--BrianPT 22:12, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

There isn't a space after a colon in the pagename (the filing system that we use - details at LW:PN). A colon is used to separate the artist name (Hamill Claire) and the song title (The Moon Is A Powerful Lover), and shouldn't be treated as a normal bit of punctuation. Now, when it comes to colons that occur in album or song titles, then a space after the colon is appropriate, as in something like Rush:The Spirit Of Radio: Greatest Hits 1974-1987 (2003). Hope this helps clear things up! -    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:23, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
okay--BrianPT 22:31, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

Scorpions#Other_Songs Edit

All the songs (bar 1) in the extremely long Other Song list on Scorpions page need to be redirected to their equivalent title but with artist name of Scorpions (i.e. they need their prefix changing and more importantly to be recognised as being Scorpions and not THE Scorpions). If this was done I reckon most of these songs could actually be removed from the page, since most are allocated to albums under correct name of Scorpions. Since this is a "Herculean task", is there any way of doing this like there is with Batch Move?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 12:18, 8 June 2008 (EDT) P.S. And no I am not volunteering to do it manually :P

No. Although doing a preview of Batch Move will show you which titles need to be moved (they will show a red link), which makes things a little bit easier. (hmmm. batch redirect. that would be cool....tekno?)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:10, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
UPDATE - done. And Bowie too (me and Senv did that page between us...he saw it on my "worklist..remember? hee hee). I also knocked a few off Georgie boy's. What's the problem with "Gone Troppo" ?? Just curious.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:31, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
When I was working on George Harrison, I only cleaned up/added albums up to the "Gone Troppo" album. Nothing was wrong with the song, that was just where I quit on the Artist page.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:30, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
AAh..Ok. Thank you. Noted.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 15:42, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Your Gold Star... Edit

Barnstar-minor The Minor Barnstar
Keifer, I hereby award you this barnstar for being a clever !@?$  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:17, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

*The room jumps to their feet..round of applause..."For he's a jolly good fellow, for he's a jolly good fellow...."*
P.S. Note the minor....Okay so maybe I'm feeling a bit mean now, so here's a bonus point

Barnstars? I haven't seen them around for a long time! Maybe Redxx should get a barnstar for resurrecting them.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:52, 9 June 2008 (EDT)
Leave it to Redxx to resurrect the dead and make it fun again. I was thinking that we should do something similar - for real, this time - to barnstars, but a little more "LyricWiki" and a little less "Wikipedia"-like. Gold stars to Gold Records or some such. I was also thinking that it would be nice if it was a thing passed from user to user. One person earns a "Gold Record" and then finds someone else doing good editing and then passes it on. In my own mind, I think this should be a template, with the talk page listing the order that the "award" was given/handed down. More than one of a "type" can be working its way around, with the templates being "GoldRecord1", "GoldRecord2", "PlatinumRecord1", etc. (Not so many that things get overwhelming, since only a few dozen are logged in users each day.) I think that would be a perfect things for Redxx to start! (Yeah, I'm volunteering you! You resurrected the barnstar, after all!) If I had one, I'd give it to Kingnee for adding the explanation to the Artist template!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:30, 9 June 2008 (EDT)
Gold Record The Gold Record
Kiefer, I hereby present you with this Gold Record for all the assistance and support you have given me! Thank you!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:15, 11 June 2008 (EDT)
Did you check that Queen Wiki site out btw? (i.e. your bonus point) ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:19, 11 June 2008 (EDT)
See, I give you an idea, and you run with it. Not just a little, but a whole !@#$!! marathon. You rock hard! (I guess I'm supposed to pass it on now, eh? I guess "tag-backs" wouldn't be fair, so I'll have to try to be on a bit more in the next couple of days to find someone. *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*)
Until you mentioned it, I didn't notice the little website box beside the star! A Spanish Queen wiki? That's a bit...unusual. They certainly appear to be pretty thorough with regards to artwork, don't they?!? Wooooo! Super Stone Cold Crazy!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:41, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Artist page sectioning, bot & API Edit

Hi, Kiefer,

I think you should take a look at this note. If I'm right, artist page sectioning has some side effects, leading to bot and API misinterpretation of such pages. Regards,--Senvaikis (talk) 11:54, 18 June 2008 (EDT)

This is likely something that needs to be brought up with Sean, as he does the work with site/project integration. Sorry, but on this subject, I'm not much help. (I'm the organization/formatting/uniformity guy!  :-] )    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:03, 21 June 2008 (EDT)

Problem with some singles Edit

Well, as you helped me some weeks ago ordering all those Keane singles, I'll ask for your help with a couple of them that made a bit of trouble for me. They're Atlantic, and Try Again. It's better explained on my User Talk

Hope you can help me soon, I'd really like to finish that Keane works :P



Check this outEdit

I know you do a lot of formattery, so I thought you might find interest in what I whipped up tonight: {{SUBST:SF2}}. It just makes things a little quicker, reducing 'SongFooter|artist=artistname|song=songname|fLetter=symbol|iTunes= ~ ~ ~ ~' to 'SUBST:SF2|artistname|songname|fLetter', and then when you save, makes it a normal footer template like you'd find on any other song page. However: it is less goof proof than good old 'songfooter' because it requires three arguments.
Right now, it's not much use to do anything, but I might make it more tricked out (who knows it might go from 'songfooter2' to 'songformatter')
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 04:52, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

PS, this really isn't a 'general public' kind of thing yet, so anyone who happens to read this: know what you are doing first!

Albums which are still To Be Released Edit

Do we have a template for marking this? Or should it even be mentioned? Example: Staind's “Illusion Of Progress is scheduled to come out in August. KaBoOM 444 20:48, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

No template as far as I know. I normally just use a bulleted note below the Album's link on the Artist's page like:
  • Album is due to be released on July 1, 2008.
Then I also put a similar note below the Album template on the Album's page. Then whenever it is released, someone usually comes around and deletes the note or changes it to "Album was released on July 1, 2008."    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:37, 27 June 2008 (EDT)
Thanks, bud. I was going to do that, but, I just wanted to make sure. KaBoOM 444 19:54, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Formatting of compilations with ex-members or bands Edit

Hi, Kiefer,

would you mind to take a look here? I need your help; tia, --Senvaikis (talk) 06:50, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Re: Special:Contributions/Gabolin Edit

Discussion moved to User talk:Attendant

Esperanza Newsletter Updated for July Edit


Page Creation

Please check our Page Creation of the Month! Hopefully within this month that will be completely done.

Bureaucracy for Kiefer

I would like to present my personal candidate for bureaucracy: Kiefer!!! Please do let him know he is appreciated in this site, and how his contributions have helped LyricWiki.

Sean gorter 08:35, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh! Edit

I'm new here, Thanks a lot. (: — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Saleemz (talkcontribs).

No problem! Some sites separate multi-disk sets that way, LyricWiki doesn't. (If it all comes together in one package, it's a single entry.) Happy editing!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   17:08, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

Re: Your message on Hall & Oates Edit

Hi, thanks for the heads-up about LW:PN. However, I have noticed that the "Hall And Oates" section, as opposed to the "Hall & Oates" section, contains much less information. Perhaps there is a way to change "Hall & Oates" to "Hall And Oates" as per LW:PN? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by HerrCommissar (talkcontribs).


In my opinion the best course of action would be to #Redirect all of the "Hall And Oates" songs to their corresponding "Hall & Oates" pages. An admin can do that with a special utility, so I can do that later, when I have some time. Does that help?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 09:27, 7 July 2008 (EDT)
Created a #Redirect on the "Hall And Oates" page to "Hall & Oates" as per the "commonly misspelled band names" section on LW:PN, thanks for your time. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by HerrCommissar (talkcontribs).

Seems like I haven't bothered you in a while so... Edit

K, well you know how I like getting things right, right? Well it's like this. the second pipe. Caps in song names and in album names. What IS the correct way of approaching this? Yes, fine and dandy for weird titles where the capitalisation is somewhat obvious, but I'm talking more of your bog standard, nothing out of the ordinary, everyday kind of titles.

The reason I ask is because I don't want to spend my time viewing words in lower case within titles as "errors" and correcting the same, if they aren't actually "errors", do I now? Because of course that would simply be wasting time I could be using to do something more productive. And if these words aren't to be capitalised, are we expected just to assume in every case we come across that the titles appearing on the page have been formatted exactly as the artist intended, i.e. as per the album cover?

Seems to me that unless there is already a procedure in place that I have overlooked, there definitely needs to be, because I'm sure I'm not the only one who's a bit exasperated by this. Nor do I imagine for one minute that I'm the only one who corrects these "errors" when they come across the obvious annoyance of the editor who kindly created the entry...

A possible solution of course would be to adopt the same capitalisation rules for the second pipe as Musibrainz. This could also prove helpful with the external links of course. The only problem there is that our help page would have to be far simpler to understand than Musicbrainz, because there sure is a hell of a lot to learn about which words are correct to capitalise (believe me I tried deciphering it all one day and gave up >> Musicbrainz - Capitalization Standard for English).

I know, I know, it's always been a touchy subject...Sorry I'm having a bit of a bad day..I don't mean to sound you really x  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 06:34, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Please show me.. Edit

how to deal correctly with this song page...David Bowie:Peace On Earth - Little Drummer Boy i.e. it's very much a collaboration with the old crooner himself aka Mr Crosby. I remember we had similar discussion a while back but can't recall how it should be resolved...
Need for a collaborative template perhaps KingNee..? ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 18:58, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Do you know the origin of the song?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:25, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
Rfl..and THAT'S your final answer??? Yes..I know a bit. I think Bowie was just out of rehab trying to get off drugs and stuff and it was on Bing's Christmas Show (I've seen the performance many times). I also know Bing died shortly afterwards...Sure has a strange effect on me too, whenever I watch, very weird indeed... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:04, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
Hey, give me a break, the answer is all in the context of the song's origin!  :-] *sigh* In this case, I feel that both artists should be used in the pagename. The page should be under David Bowie And Bing Crosby:Peace On Earth - Little Drummer Boy (or should it be David Bowie And Bing Crosby:Peace On Earth/Little Drummer Boy?). If it was on an album that was released by David Bowie, I would likely put it under just David Bowie:Peace On Earth - Little Drummer Boy, with Bing as a featured artist, much like Queen's Under Pressure (which, surprise, surprise, features Bowie). Whoever's album it was on first gets the credit. On occasion, I figure there would be exceptions. If a song was released as a single before being placed on an album and the single listed both artists (some 80s duets did this, I think) then the song should stay listed as by both artists, and the album listing should reflect this.
At any rate, it's a big fat if>then type of deal with stuff like this. Basically, if you feel that it is a true collaboration, and not one artist inviting another artist to appear on their upcoming album, then the song should have both artists in the pagename. If it's a "hey, I can find a little somethin' for you to do on my next album if you wanna come over to the studio and play for a day" kind of a thing, then play it as a featured artist. That's my take, anyhow. And a late night, tired-eyes one at that...I was going to bed and decided to see if you replied, and lo and behold you did! So apologies if it rambles and doesn't make sense. I'm goin' beddy-bye now. snooooore.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:01, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
Hee Hee Well I totally misunderstood that didn't I? I thought you was doing your bit for Esperanza, the destressing thingy, like trying to distract me in view of my earlier moan...rfl...I thought you meant the origin of the actual collaboration, their recording it together..haa haa. Ok, I'm composed again now (almost).
I ask you these type of questions because I think we often view these things in much the same way. So yes I asked you about this because Bowie was not a featured artist, nor was Bing. This was an equal collaboration. It was released as a single with both artist's being given equal status.
So are you saying create a seperate artist page just for this one song? Because obviously the song template won't be operable otherwise. Ergo the problem. (Incidentally I am having discussion along similar lines over on the Song Template talk page). ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:28, 9 July 2008 (EDT)


I redirected everything from Manhattan Transfer to The Manhattan Transfer Janitor failed to add the redirected songs to the OS section in TMT, or MT. Did I do something wrong? Another related item: When a lyric page is redirected, the redirect is not indicated in the history? TIA EchoSierra 01:45, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

featuring... Edit

I just want to be sure about something. Featured artists. MusicBrainz often list featured artists as being an actual part of the song name. As such we often get songs with this included in link. Am I right not to include featured artists in page name? What if there are 2 versions, one with and one without?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 15:40, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Featured artists really shouldn't be included in a pagename. The reason basically is that the actual title of the song doesn't include the featured artist, because basically that means that the song can never be done unless that artist is the featured artist. Doesn't make sense. It would be weird if say Coldplay covered Queen's "Under Pressure" and they had to title it "Under Pressure (feat. David Bowie)" and David Bowie didn't actually sing. That's just mad...MAD, I tell you! If there are two versions, one with a featured artist, and one without, then the parenthetical add-on can have the featured artist, of course, to differentiate between the two. Of course, I know that you knew all of this, and just needed confirmation. No problem. I needed an easy question after the crazy week I had instructing over fifty 12-15 year old boys this week! Cheers!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   18:44, 18 July 2008 (EDT)
Thank you :-) and for...well you know. Are you looking forward to a long summer break now? 50 x 12 year old boys? That sounds impossible (lol) At least my 12 year old charge (of which there is only the one, as in singular...hee hee) is a girl....On second thoughts... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:07, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
Impossible is about right. It was fun most of the time, but focus is not exactly something boys that age have. I've taught girls, too, and it's a different challenge there. Less chaotic, though! But I should have a bit of a break now, so that I can be around a bit more. After being basically away for the past 5-6 weeks, I just feel like I'm playing catch-up with all that's going on.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:36, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

So ... Are We Cool? Edit

Sooooo.... are we done talking about what was on my talk page? You didn't reply to my last statement, so I just wanted to make sure we're concluded. Are we agreeing to disagree or just not talking? --Åqúàŧĩkī - É - Ŧ 00:40, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

We're okay. I'm done...I basically have nothing to add right now. I guess I'll chime in when there's a proposal for Sean to mull over. To be honest, I'm not exactly sure what changes you're really looking for. The term "meta-administration" reeks of jargon and goes over my head, I'm afraid!  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:33, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Okay. I'll try again sometime in the future, but I'll give it a rest for the time being. Thanks. --Åqúàŧĩkī - É - Ŧ 22:37, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
You don't have to give it a rest, really. If you want to make a proposal, then feel free to do so. Just because I wasn't thrilled with the word choice doesn't mean that I'm going to hold anything against you. I know that you want the best for the site. And a good idea is a good idea. Just make sure you present it plainly and clearly for us non-techies! :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:48, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
OK. I'll ruminate and come up with a clear expression of what I'm thinking for the Community Portal. Thanks for staying positive. --Åqúàŧĩkī - É - Ŧ 01:02, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Why I do the things I do... Edit

I just wanted to explain two things to you about the way I work (so you'll understand) and also to ask for your opinion on the same:

  1. I can't recall how the subject came up, but I recently had a discussion with our friend Senv in which you were referred to, and after reading your exchange of posts I decided to adopt the "If we can't provide the correct version of lyrics insert a link to a pre-existing page" kind of attitude. (Well I concluded, on balance, that this was probably more helpful than presenting a totally blank page.) However, since the reason I hadn't done this before is because I do not wish to mislead, I add the parenthetical description totally outside of the link and I format it in ordinary typeface. I do this so the information about it being a different version is there, but not overly emphasised. If I subsequently manage to obtain the correct version, then of course I change it and boldly go where no man has gone before.. Sorry, I just got overcome with Cap'n Kirk there for a minute.
  2. Many songs remain in OS lists, not because they haven't been/aren't able to be verified (although if editors don't bother to add the release to the song's page...), but simply because editors haven't got anywhere more appropriate to put them. With Janitor's contributions added to this, OS would seem to have become something of a general dumping ground. That's fine as far as it goes. Useful in a kicking off point. But it does seem wrong to me for this dumping ground to be considered the end point for verified songs. I'm sure that these songs being left in the OS list also puts many editors off dealing with lengthy OS lists on artists' pages. You will have noticed that I usually create separate categories based on the results I obtain after I have researched an OS list (e.g. Songs from Soundtracks, Unreleased, Compilations, Singles, Collaborations, etc.). By doing this I am hoping that other editors will understand that the songs remaining in the OS list are the ones that still need to be verified. I am obviously not the only one who does this of course, but personally I would like to see something like this become procedure, with maybe a section allowing for this incorporated into the template of the artists page, since I believe it would assist us all. What do you reckon?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:07, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
So now you're going to try to explain the things you do?  :-]
I don't believe I've ever separated attributed songs under their own header, instead leaving them under the Other Songs section with a note of explanation as to the song's origin, but I have seen such headers and like them. So, I'm good with it.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:15, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

When you got a minute... Edit

Could you please help this user out >> LyricWiki_talk:Community_Portal#Same_title.2C_different_lyrics, only I don't know what to suggest. Thank you :-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:13, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank you :-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:37, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Watchlist Feeds Edit

As mentioned on Main Page, we now have watchlist RSS/Atom feeds at Special:WatchlistFeed.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 01:38, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Subsectioning and Collaborations Edit

Hi, Kiefer, have two formatting-related questions, both inspired by Robert Cray page (trying to make it real Silver ;)).

  1. What's the best practice in such cases when album is recorded in collaboration with other artists, and collaboration is based on equal participation? I mean Showdown!, recorded by Albert Collins, Robert Cray And Johnny Copeland. So,
    1. Was I right creating special 'artist' page for this particular album only?
    2. Was I right adding all this album tracks listing into Robert Cray page? (otherwise songs from this album would be invisible to API f-n getArtist)
  2. What is the best formatting strategy to separate official_albums/singles/compilations/rarities_bootlegs/appearences/collaborations etc. in the artist page? I've seen using subsections for that (of type =Singles=), so tried to apply this approach. What I don't like in such approach is that all remaining sections (band members, related, external links etc.) in such case are shown as subsections of last album category section (Collaborations in our case).

So, would you be so kind to cast your eye over this page, when you'll have a free minute, and make your notes for me? Tia, --Senvaikis (talk) 05:30, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Was just nosing around and I know Kiefer is quite busy at present so in the interim I thought I'd do my usual "trying to be helpful" thing. Now, I'm not saying I can answer all your queries but...:
    1. Yes you did exactly the right thing creating an artist page. However, you didn't create an artist page for the album. You created an artist page for the collaboration. Who knows, they may do more. Where collaboration is based on equal participation, we create a separate artist page. This applies even if it means there is only one song on the page. If it's simply a case of a featured artist, we just insert the *new* parameter |fa = at end of the {{song}} template and of course no separate page is created.
  1. Regarding subsections.
  • Official_albums and compilation albums should not be sub-sectioned, but listed in chronological order with Level 2 headings.
  • Singles I don't usually detail these myself. My reasons for this are threefold:
1) We don't aim to provide complete discographies.
2) We don't want artist pages to become oversized.
3) The songs are usually already allocated to an album on artists page. As such it is of course unnecessary to have them detailed twice.
However, I believe I'm right in saying that singles should also be listed, like compilations, in chronological order, in amongst the other albums.
  • Bootlegs we don't normally list. Most of the songs are on official albums in any event and we prefer to stick with those. For any rare songs on bootleg albums that cannot be found on any official releases, I would suggest creating a separate category something like "Songs from Bootleg Albums" or "Unofficial Releases".
  • Songs not recorded and only ever performed live? I would also suggest creating a separate category, e.g. "Unreleased".
  • As for collaborations? Well if these are odd songs, then I would suggest these also be listed under a separate category, e.g. "Collaborations". However, I see on the Robert Cray page you have detailed the entire albums and for this I don't know. Personally, I would've listed these albums not in separate sub section, but like compilations, in chronological order amongst other albums. However, this is only my opinion.
One final point, I'm never too sure myself when it comes to choosing a level for a heading in these user created categories. As such I just go with what seems appropriate. Usually the number of songs determines it for me. That having been said, what goes for one goes for all. If I decide level 2 is appropriate, then all the user created categories become level 2 too. Personally I would like to have level 2 "Other Songs" with all these sub sections as Level 3 but this would present confusion/problems as there is already section for "Other Songs". Maybe Kiefer will have some ideas. Sub sectioning is something I would like to get others input on, since I believe it needs to be addressed and some uniformity applied. Maybe I'll make it my personal quest (lol)!!
Hope this all helps!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 09:41, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks, Red; now let me make some notes over yours (making no pretension to be right):

  1. Ok, - haven't nothing against listing albums and compilations in the same manner;
  2. I'd not be so emphatic regarding singles (not including them as releases at all): I agree that in most ordinary cases, when all songs in a single have their equivalent in official albums, singles may and even must be omitted. But some artists have a strange habit to record a huge number of singles; to crown it all - some songs (or versions) you can find only on those singles. The best sample of such deviant (from those I know) is The Beautiful South. While melting OS in their page I had no other choice but listing singles; more over - even multiple singles with the same name and year of release. Of course, I could just bundle all those songs in one section "Songs from singles", but agree - some important, or just interesting information would be lost then.
  3. The same should be said speaking about bootlegs - I'd never overcame OS of Tom Waits without including his bootleg "Tales..." series. And again, - if we've wasted our time finding all this information (where from all those songs comes) - why should we mask this info, if we've found it already anyway? Agree - that's not official releases; but on other hand - we aren't selling them - just providing information about lyrics, as it is, de facto. I'm not sure about some possible juridical arguments against such point of view; but I'm sure that any page formatting rules can be treated as argument for such information masking.
  4. Collaboration: the same. You are suggesting to just list songs from Showdown! in a common crowd of songs from all other possible albums made in collaboration with someone else. But here I should remind you that this album was the first one from five Robert's Grammy awarded albums. Would it be fair, if such album was not even mentioned in information, returned by getArtist()?

Resuming: what would you say about such possible solution: list all releases of artist (which must be listed to cover all known lyrics) in a simple chronological order by date, just pointing information about release category (official album/single/...) in album header parameter "releaseType"? That'd solved the second problem at the same breath - we'd have no need for any subsectioning. --Senvaikis (talk) 14:59, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Ok. As always you raise some interesting points Senv.
  1. Good.
  2. I agree wholeheartedly. Don't get me wrong, if I was presented with 3 songs off a single that I couldn't allocate to an album, I would also list the single. I have just never found myself in that position. I can usually wittle the 3 songs down to 1 (which I then put in a sub-category). And like I have indicated above, I always try to allocate songs from OS lists in this way for the reasons I have given above (i.e. page size, listed on album so unnecessary to list twice, etc.) I guess the point I was trying to make is just that some think of artist pages as discographies and attempt to list everything, every single, every compilation, etc. (even when there are no They do not think enough about what they are doing, or why and therefore they are not selective in their choices.
  3. Don't know what else to say about bootlegs. I am just telling you what I was told by an admin when I came here and asked about myself this. Because they are illegitimate I just accepted this. However, whilst this is discouraged, if there is a valid reason to list a particular bootleg, by which I mean none of the songs can be found on any official releases (which is somewhat unusual...), then I would say it's Ok. In saying this I note how you have decided upon including the same, i.e.

I'd never overcame OS of Tom Waits without including his bootleg "Tales..." series...

As such it seems that you are being selective, i.e. not just listing a bootleg for the sake of it. Of course another problem with listing bootlegs is album cover art. Not always so easy to find is it, eh? ;)
4. And no, you have misunderstood this:

You are suggesting to just list songs from Showdown! in a common crowd of songs from
all other possible albums made in collaboration with someone else

What I said was "if these are odd songs, then I would suggest these also be listed under a separate category, e.g. "Collaborations"." But when it comes to collaborative albums like Showdown!, "Personally, I would've listed these albums not in separate sub section, but like compilations, in chronological order amongst other albums, (i.e. See 1). I apologise, because on re-reading that sentence I can see that I should have omitted the word 'seperate' as I believe this is probably what caused the confusion, but I trust I have explained myself better now and that what I'm suggesting in fact raises their importance.

As for your final point. We all have our own way of working. We all do this voluntarily, none of us get paid and therefore it is up to each of us what we choose to do. I have never received any computer training (is why I get lost sometimes in terminolgy, API etc. etc.). I am self taught. I learn from watching others, researching and problem solving. My particular speciality is research. As such I put this to good use on LyricWiki allocating songs in OS lists. I find this quite challenging. I also think it's the best place to start when I hit on a page. Once the songs are all allocated I move on. There is no point in listing albums if we haven't got the lyrics. We don't want to inflate artist pages detailing the same songs twice. And as I said before, we do not aim to provide complete discographies. So I don't really see that what you are suggesting is really any different to what we are already doing. Forgive me if I am misunderstanding you.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:49, 31 July 2008 (EDT)
Okay, I visit briefly, and I have this posted on my talk page?!?  :-] Let's see if I can quickly answer some of the questions, although pardon me if I duplicate Redxx replies or cause more confusion by not agreeing.
1. Sounds like you did the right thing. If it's a true collaboration, list the participants as listed on the album. New artist page for the album is fine, and the album is okay to be listed on the various participants' solo pages. (So, including it on the Robert Cray page is fine.
2. Studio albums, live albums, and major greatest hits compilations should all be listed chronologically. I see that you have H1-headers for Albums, Compilations, and Collaborations. H1 headers shouldn't be on pages. The page title (Robert Cray, in this instance) is the only H1 header allowed. (Wikipedia standard, and something we're trying to follow as well to keep things as uniform as possible for the various applications that use the site database.) Subsections for albums (using a normal H2-header with two equal signs) can be made for Rarities and Singles, but should really only be a link to the actual album itself, without a track listing on the artist page. This is an attempt mostly to keep the Artist's page from becoming overly long and difficult to scan for the necessary information. Usually these items are of less interest than the major releases. A shorter page also helps ensure that when the page is edited that it gets saved without any glitches. Songs pages can also be given special headers, such as Collaborations, Songs as a Featured Artist, Unreleased Songs (usually songs that were written for an album but were unused but perhaps released to fan club members or on the artist's website or songs only performed live - often cover songs), or Songs On Compilations (tribute albums or other multi-artist releases). None of these headers are written in stone, but those are the guidelines that seem to work best. Bootlegs, as Redxx mentioned aren't normally listed, but as you noted, sometimes bootlegs have songs that aren't on other albums but that we do have lyrics for, and so noting these under "Unreleased Songs" with a note about the song's origin is a perfectly appropriate thing. If the bootleg is well-known and often referenced to by an Artist's fans, then I can understand why it might need inclusion on the page.
3. I didn't have a 3, but I want to clarify perhaps what Redxx is saying about not aiming to provide complete discographies. While it is true that the site aim isn't to include every small-press "best-of" compilation or artist bootleg, we do aim to have every major release. With singles, I personally think that having that information is a good thing, but I also don't really think that the main Artist page needs to have all 20+ singles listed with a track listing of B-sides (since there really isn't such a thing anymore, technically!), which is why the single link to the album page. It's a balance between including the essential information, but not making the pages so overwhelming that a visitor can't find anything with an appropriate amount of ease.
Hopefully this all made sense. As Redxx stated, I'm currently a bit busy, but I still try to stop by on a daily basis to answer notes and do a few things to keep from getting too rusty.  :-] So, this was written fairly quickly.
Happy editing to all -    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:50, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

The Fab Four Edit

Seeing as how I know you put some of this info on the page, I just wanted to bring this edit to your attention, as I am not happy for this info to be removed. Since I don't know the reason why this (unregistered) user thought they should remove this info, I decided not to actually revert the edit, but to take certain steps to rectify this until you get a chance to look at it yourself. Just to explain, the first brackets are the instruments Wikipedia mentions. The italicised text is not. Over to you... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 08:50, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, that was really strange. Removes a bunch of stuff, and then slowly returns some of the info. I reverted that section, and did some header corrections as well. I'm thinking the compilation section still needs some work, as I don't like the "See this link" notes, but I'm a little unsure what to do. Normally I would say no tracklists, but those are major albums by a major artist, and there aren't going to be much new from them, so perhaps having those missing tracklists wouldn't be a horrible thing. If we can't make an exception for the Fab Four, who can we make an exception for, eh?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:31, 4 August 2008 (EDT)
I put info back (is what I meant by "I decided not to actually revert the edit, but to take certain steps to rectify this until.."). Sorry, I could've explained that better. Anyway, you will see that I have now moved the tracklisting for the Red and Blue albums back onto the artist page, because after thinking about what you said I concluded, like you, that there shouldn't be much need for editing the page because there can't be much that hasn't been released. Added to which the group are of course no longer in existence. As such it shouldn't present a problem being big. I hadn't thought about it like that before, so thanks, I shall remember that!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 11:43, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

Revamping eh? Edit

D'you reckon we are all in competition now for the Best and Most Informative User Page Award? And Ok I gotta admit you've made a good effort. I particularly like the "Pages that Redxx has kindly assisted straightening up" bit. And you get 8 out of 10 for your musical taste (incidentally, the Floyd gave you 5.76 of the 8 points, Bohemian Rhapsody gave you 2.24). But look what I've got waiting in the shadows..User:Redxx/Worklist. Impressed huh? Ok I nicked it from Aquatiki (a minor point which I feel will be overlooked). Oh and I've also got a bot..she's called Sandbot ;) Don't ask me how the darn thing works, but I thought if it's good enough for Anjelina Jolie it's good enough for me!! (hee hee)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:27, 9 August 2008 (EDT)

Hmmmm. Now how do I get the other 2 points? I'm sure I'm missing a bunch of good stuff. I've already thought of a few that should go on there, but I've been busy working on The Men, which had one album, but had one of my favorites, Church of Logic, Sin & Love, so I haven't added anything. So, where should I head to earn your complete musical respect?  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:45, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
Now I have properly looked: The Stones, the Who, Dire Straits, R.E.M...on this basis you got an additional 5 points. Aquamarine, eh? Nice *sigh* (One of my all time fave songs is Mmmmmmmmm Mmmmmmmmm Crash Test Dummies...sends me to sleep)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 10:05, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
Whew! Extra credit..SWEET! The Stones reminds me...Sympathy for the Devil should be on there as well. I was pretty much going with what I had on my computer, and trying not to overload with one artist too much. (I need to add Blue Öyster Cult:Astronomy and Blue Öyster Cult:Joan Crawford and Jethro Tull:Songs From The Wood and Robbie Robertson:Day Of Reckoning (Burnin For You) and Chris Rea:The Road To Hell (Part One) & (Part Two) and Randy Newman:Feels Like Home and....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   12:37, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

When you got a minute... Edit

Seeing as you seem to like caps even more than me (featured/Featured...hee hee) I would be grateful for your thoughts on this: [2]
Although I might re-cap some words (e.g. "Bonus Tracks"), after looking at the comments this user makes when completing summaries, my thoughts on this are that he is well informed and knows what he is talking about with regards to "lowercased conjunctions, prepositions" and "the standard English song/album title rule" so I'll probably leave it. I believe he is probably referring to the same capitalisation rules adopted by MusicBrainz. (I spent a few hours trying to take that all in one day and gave up, so credit to him if he understands it. It totally done my head in!!)
However, it's cases like this that make me think that there should be a policy on capitalising words in the second pipe. The reason I say that is because after perusing his contributions, it would very much seem that he chooses to spend most of his time on LW simply going from page to page changing caps to lower-case (as indeed we all could choose to do...), not because this is against LW policy, but simply because he doesn't like them since they are not in line with "the standard English song/album title rule". When of course he could be using the hours he devotes to doing this more productively, by doing things that do actually need to be done!! ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 09:00, 12 August 2008 (EDT)

My attitude has essentially been that I don't go too crazy over the display capitalization. If it is something that that user is good at, then good for them! Creating a display policy is (as you found out at MusicBrainz) somewhat of a mind-bender. The general rules aren't so hard (lowercase the, is, etc. except when at the beginning of the title), but there are some exceptions and communicating those effectively is difficult. (Plus, although fairly uncommon, sometimes the Artist does away with the normal capitalization scheme anyway, so all those rules would go out the window!) Also, do we really need to go worrying about the display capitalization scheme being perfect right now? It appears as though we are currently trying to get SongFooters and such completed and up-to-par. Then, there's the challenge of getting those non-English users to understand and use the policy. Finally, there's then the need to have a policy for French, German, Russian, Greek, etc., etc., etc. I am sooooooo not the linguist, and the whole situation makes my head spin (and finally explode in spectacular Technicolor).
I'm not strictly against a page for capitalization guidelines, but I think I'd be against it being official policy, as that implies a "must-do" kind of attitude.
BTW, I'm thinking of revamping the Help pages sometime in the next few weeks. I'm not sure how, exactly, but I think that it needs to be beautified a bit and just looked over. Especially now that we're getting to be persnickety about things for the new ranking system. I revamped everything heavily two years ago and it's about time for a new look at the help pages. I'd like to get rid of the dashed boxes that surround the examples, primarily. I just don't think that they're "purty" enough.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   10:46, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
I have been doing a little "updating" of the help pages recently myself, so I'm in total agreement with you there. I have a big advantage over some of course (but not you), because what some of the other admin might take for granted, I am still learning. As such, I often need to seek info and you'd be surprised how often the Help pages don't actually provide it. Nor do they point you in the direction where this info can be found. And even if the Help pages do direct you to a template page, the info isn't always on there either, or in a way that a novice user can easily understand. I believe it is very important that we provide users with Help pages that do actually help them and are as informative as they can be. I have often been givien responsibility in my professional life for training and knowing and understanding the problems I myself have encountered has assisted me greatly in knowing the value of a good help manual (such as I have then gone on to provide to my trainees). So I'm very pleased that you are thinking of addressing this issue. Good on yer!!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 11:18, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
Double-yes on the templates being updated. I heard mention of someone putting the template documentation on a separate page that is included on the actual template page or some such so that changing the documentation doesn't start a ripple effect across the site. That needs to be done. And the template help page needs updating. Also the Community Portal should be updated, the Firefox extensions page should be moved to a more general locations, and.... Basically, I wish I had even more time to devote to the site!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   11:34, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
We are a very good team. We all bring our individual skills to this. We all do what we can, when we can. Oh and I also wanted to say, don't spend your valuable time doing anything that you think SandBot could do , cos I defo feel she is going to prove quite valuable to us. Just tell me if you think she might be able to help and I'll set her to work her for you.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 11:56, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
P.S. She objected under "the standard English Bot naming rules" to being called Sandbot, so I had to change her name to SandBot.

Already SOTDEdit

Paul Simon:You Can Call Me Al was already the Song Of The Day on June 18, 2007. Did you look at Criteria #4?— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hornean (talkcontribs).

Yup, it was a typo. I originally was going to do "Al", but then wrote about "Graceland" instead. Just didn't change the link. Thanks.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   13:13, 15 August 2008 (EDT)
Tut tut...I really don't know about you at times. I'm just glad to see that someone's keeping their eye on you while I'm otherwise engaged hassling Aqua with my silly questions and while I'm busy categorising the remaining 1000 uncategorised songs ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:42, 15 August 2008 (EDT)
Eyes are always watching...always watching! paranoia, or merely aware of the Orwellian nature of a wiki...? I'll never tell.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:53, 15 August 2008 (EDT)

Just wanted to ensure... Edit saw this LyricWiki_talk:Community_Portal#Thank_you_from_a_newbie. Because you know it was you who made me want to stay here and help. And it was KingNee that made me realise that this had been a good decision. Yes, you're right, Redxx getting a bit sentimental = drunk. Well, tis true, but I don't drink much (I'm more of a smoker But considering that I've just survived one of the worst days of my life, I kinda felt the need. But I DID survive it. And you know what I learnt about myself along the way? I ain't half brave for a 5ft nothing, 5 stone weakling !! (rfl)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 19:18, 16 August 2008 (EDT)

"Sentimental = drunk", eh? I've heard of worse equations that end in "= drunk" before. Cheers!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:26, 16 August 2008 (EDT)

Psssst..over here...Edit

User_talk:Aquatiki#Remember_when...  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 08:50, 18 August 2008 (EDT)

Who da man?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:30, 18 August 2008 (EDT)

Just wanted to say... Edit

You are doing an excellent job with updating help pages from what I can see. If users are able to find the information it will help them know better how to complete a page. And if more users get to know better how to complete a page, that will obviously help all of us. So what you are doing is extremely worthwhile (thank you). It's just a pity about this: Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs#Featured_Artists. I tried mucking around with it but no joy. I reckon the only way round it would be to create something akin to a false page, with a shorter album name and shorter artist names.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:54, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for the encouragement. It's going slowly, but at least it's going. My favorite wacky featured-artist vandal guy hasn't been on, so I've had a little free time!  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:58, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

RE: Userboxes Edit

No, no, good revisions as to putting all the userboxes in one place. I moved from templacespace to LyricWiki space on Userboxes because our userboxes do not have a parent page, I had planned a title override, but moving it back is fine.

As for Metalocalypse, I have to go through the songs that actually register as the Metalocalypse Soundtrack. It is very strange but this image appeared as the album art on my Zune when I added the songs. Can songs carry album art in their programming? I did not think they could. Anyway the songs that sound the same but have completely different lyrics, or at least for the post part, I will keep under Internet, like Awaken and Awaken Mustakrakish. In the end the page will probably be deleted, as IPs added most of those tracks with no reference whatsoever. -PatPeter 15:26, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

I'm not sure how Zune works, but if it links to the web to get info about tracks, it could very well be that it also downloads whatever artwork has been assigned to that track in the Zune database. I know that my media player basically does the same thing when I copy a new disc or audio file to my hard drive. I've seen that artwork somewhere before, but I believe it was as artwork to one of the in-show albums, not a true album. Maybe someone somewhere tried to recreate the album in the "real" world. For instance, recently we discovered that someone began (and abandoned, strangely enough) an album listing for the top Billboard hits of 2007. The album didn't actually exist, however, except as a manufactured torrent bundle. Because it wasn't "real" the album page was deleted. There's enough work to be done keeping up with the official albums that are released - trying to keep up with the virtual and small press/bootleg albums would just overwhelm things.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:34, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

Wiki-Lyrics Edit

Hi, just wanted to let you know I've released a new version of Wiki-Lyrics script, which should finally fix the problems with it (for real this time :). I've left a message to Kingnee1114lyrics but I've just realized he won't be reading it anytime soon. Please, take care of updating the script control page. --Attendant 16:13, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

Thank you for the update and bringing this to my attention. I will update the page immediately.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:13, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

Re: Ich Und Ich Edit


thank you for your message, but in fact even in Germany a lot of German songs are capitalized with all first capitals to uppercase-letters, because this looks better.

Kind regards, Chris 12:30, 21 August 2008 (EDT)

In German, nouns are capitalized (Ref: German spelling reform of 1996), other words are not. (Like I'm telling you something you don't follow those rules on your User page.) So normally, capitalizing every word isn't the way to go. We try (and other German users have passionately brought this up before due to the all-inclusive capitalization rules for pagenames) to follow the Artist's nation's rules of capitalization whenever possible for the display.
Are you saying that Ich+Ich choose artistically to capitalize all of their words? (If that was the case, then capitalizing all words as they do would be perfectly acceptable, because the Artist's choice trumps rules due to nationality.) Because they don't appear to do so on their web page.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   13:00, 21 August 2008 (EDT)
Precisely not. The lemma should read: "Ich und Ich", "und" isn't a noun. Zaibatsu 13:36, 21 August 2008 (EDT)
What is precisely not? Do you mean that the page should be titled Ich und Ich, and not Ich Und Ich. If so, that capital is due to the pagenaming policy of the site (seen at LW:PN), which capitalizes the first letter of every word with regards to the pagename (essentially the file name in the LyricWiki database). Part of the reason for this all-inclusive capitalization style is due to the variation of capitalization around the world and so that there is one standard no matter what part of the world a user or Artist is from.
In actuality, the page name should not even include the "und", but it had to be substituted for the "+" in "Ich+Ich" due to technical limitations.
I also notice that you are currently moving things around to incorrect pagename locations. Please stop.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   13:44, 21 August 2008 (EDT)
Not to mention the fact that this conversation is currently being smeared out over several talk pages. Please understand our reasoning of why things are as they are. For scripting purposes and consistency, we have chosen to adopt the rules as they are in LW:PN. Of course, whenever you make a link to a page, you are free to update the spelling, for example: if you type [[Ich Und Ich|IcH unD iCh]] you will get IcH unD iCh (just to show the idea). --Mischko Talkicon EsperanzaIcon 14:28, 21 August 2008 (EDT)
Of course I follow the "usual" capitalizing, because there I wrote texts in full senctences - but with those names it's really different. You've got the same thing, too: Do You Know or I Kissed a Girl f. e.... Just articles are not capitalized, no special reason, just looking better than "Do you know"
But maybe I'm messing around with English titles in Germany and German ones. Maybe I'm able to find a sample back-cover. But only to show you, because I guess it isn't possible to change anymore, anyway. Chris 16:08, 25 August 2008 (EDT)

Weird pages I've seen tonight.. Edit

I dealt with the song that appears to have overwritten one of our LyricWiki Help pages, and another where artist name for song was Talk and which seemed to have become a special page, but not quite sure what to do with this one...User:Mutlee  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:48, 21 August 2008 (EDT)

Got it.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:59, 21 August 2008 (EDT)

Thank you. I didn't want to do it because it was a User page. (Obviously I don't mind editing yours...KingNee's..Aqua's..hee hee)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:29, 21 August 2008 (EDT)

Mutlee hasn't been on since April...! Feeling meek and mild lately, or something?  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:31, 21 August 2008 (EDT)
No, I just didn't want to get involved in any more wars today ;) Besides which, I'm the good cop ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:10, 21 August 2008 (EDT)

Agraceful apage Edit

Hey, thanks for helping me out with the Agraceful page. That was the first time I have ever added lyrics here,so I'm still trying to figure everything out, and I really appreciate you fixing a couple of the links and all. Thanks again.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shatterpoint (talkcontribs).

Sorry about my Slipknot edit Edit

Sorry I removed the original Slipknot s/t from the page. I didn't realize it was supposed to be there. Don't get me wrong, I want to help out, but some of my edits can result in making mistakes without my knowing. Sorry about that edit. I am new to this site, so I'll just learn more. Brambletalon 15:15, 25 August 2008 (EDT) (Formerly known as Firestream)

Not a problem at all. It takes a little while to get the "hang" of the site. Feel free to edit and ask any questions that you may have.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:30, 25 August 2008 (EDT)
Don't worry, we won't ban you for your next mistake. We adhere to the Wikipedia be bold policy: just try and we'll let you know if it's not ok. --Mischko Talkicon EsperanzaIcon09:43, 28 August 2008 (EDT)
And even if I would want to ban you for the next mistake, Kiefer, 6 times 9 or Redxx would probably have fixed it faster than I can open the page :)

Weezer Edit

You're brave...rather you than me..  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:38, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

Not too brave. There's a few other things I'd like to do with that page, And I waited to change things until the latest guy who worked on the page responded about my question. So....  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:41, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

fLetter Edit

Thanks for correcting that. I added that note on fLetter after reading this post Non-latin_non-digit_first_letter. Btw, I've given you more work to do like that today, see Help:Page_ranking/Songs#Statuspage ...
Well I like to keep you on your toes ;) ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 09:20, 28 August 2008 (EDT)

Thank you for sorting that >> Help:Page_ranking/Songs#Statuspage. Actually...when you look at the standard of my written work, for example here and here, it's a wonder you still got the authoring job ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 16:57, 28 August 2008 (EDT) P.S. For explanation why I did this see Community Portal.

Template:SporePatrioticSongs Edit

Hi. My intention of having this template is so that I add this as an external link to the Wikipedia article National Day Parade and this article List of Singaporean patriotic songs. However I haven't had the time to add all the songs in yet. And I have difficulties trying to get the lyrics as well.

I intend to also add this template to all the songs that are listed in the template when I am done updating all the links. Of course, this template would appear as a collapsible table. However I have difficulties trying to make it collapsible.

In relation to your question, I have problems trying to find the performer associated with those songs. If I am able to do so, I will most definitely move the page to credit the performer. --Tjmj 10:37, 11 September 2008 (EDT)

You may recall me saying... Edit

... about the problem I envisaged with regards to fulfilling the "Credits" requirement for Page Ranking. Well today this landed on my desk >> User_talk:Redxx#Credits.... So I went and looked for album cover in an effort to assist. I found it. But there was absolutely no info on back, inside, on CD label, etc. as to who wrote songs >>> Only who produced it. you think you could help me out here by answering team a's post please? That way I'll also know what to do in such instances ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

[3] Thank you :-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 09:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Where do you find these sites? That's pretty cool. Too bad they didn't scan the booklet, eh? That would likely have solved our problem....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Refused Edit

I know I should deal with this myself but could you take a look at the above page. The guy has worked very hard on it..and I have already communicated with him over a few things already ...I just don't want him to think I'm like on his case, his own personal stalker or something (lol)...  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:40, 29 August 2008 (EDT)

Aaaaaaaaaaah! I'll see what I can do.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   11:26, 30 August 2008 (EDT)
..and another of his pages Isis. Do you want to overlook..? We could pretend we never noticed... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Lordi Lordi Lawdy Miss ClawdyEdit

And what may I ask do we think of this particular page Eurovision Song Contest? Shall I stick it on my growing "To do" list?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 09:48, 30 August 2008 (EDT)
Oh and btw, you done such a good job on the Help Pages that you get the bonus prize. (What a guy, eh? "HARD! ROCK! HALLELUJAHHHH...." Rflabitt)

Holy $*%@#!!!!! I believe that I just threw up a little in my mouth. There is nothing on that page that is right. That is absolutely pure evil. Pure. Freakin'. Evil. To quote Monty Python: RUN AWAY!!!!!! why does she hate me so? i was perfectly happy not knowing that such a thing existed. but no, she had to bring that foul link to my talk page. and now the vision of that wretched mass of putrid sickness is seared into my mind. damn you, uberbot for spawning such a sick, twisted abomination. *goes into the fetal position, rocking slowly* the horror. the horror!
On the positive side, I am intrigued by Lordi:Hard Rock Hallelujah. *opens link to video* AAAAAAAaaaaaaah! They won the Eurovision contest!!! Didn't know they were related!! *goes back to fetal position, weeping openly*    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   11:26, 30 August 2008 (EDT)
You OK? Can I fetch you a glass of water or something? ;) ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:51, 30 August 2008 (EDT)

EP's = Album??Edit

Sorry about that Kiefer but this is indeed daft because of course EP stands for Extended Play, Extended Play being an abbrieviated term for Extended Play... Singles not Extended Play Albums. It's also extremely hard to think of anything with only three tracks as being an "album"! So can I propose this be changed?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:09, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

EPs = Album. There are quite a few differences between an EP and a single. Wikipedia. As it mentions in the article, Billboard even ranks EPs with albums, not with singles. (Super short answer because I'm exhausted and just checking in.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Yeah OK Teach ;) Funny, but I had always taken it for granted that because of their length, EP's were classified more as singles than albums. However, after reading what JM Beaubourg, one of the moderators at Rate You Music, had to say about the differences between singles and EP's, I can see that I was viewing this wrong. I think it is his own personal take and the post was written to assist users of the site when uploading, but nevertheless it made sense to me, and I quote:
"A single (7", 12", CD or otherwise) is built around the idea of a song. So, a CD that has 10 versions of the same song shouldn't automatically become an EP. If the focal point of the release is still the song, it should remain classified as a single.
At the same, an EP is built around songs that are not released on an LP. If the release is not named after a track, it can be considered an EP, otherwise only when it has more than 3 but less than 8 songs. Remixes do not count, as do releases with more remixes than original tracks." [4]
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, those are quite a few of the indicators. I could have typed that, but...Zzzzzz.  :-] Singles traditionally had an A-side and B-side, and they still usually have 2 or three songs (the 3rd often with a song created for the main album but not included tends to be a common pattern - in an effort, I think, of getting fans to shell out money for the single even though they already have the album), with remixes of the main single release, perhaps the B-side as well. EP is a shorter version of the LP. Which is why I also remove the EP notice, except when it is actually included in the official title. We don't say it's the Abbey Road LP!
On a side note, are you a Slipknot or KoRn fan? If so, could you help me by looking at Special:Contributions/ It's by my favorite Editor of Many Errors. I've already listened and double-checked one page, and another IP user corrected another page, but if you could help and watch some of these with me, it would be great.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes I know you could've typed that but you was zzzzzzz and as for "We don't say it's the Abbey Road LP!" - I couldn't agree more!
And no, I'm not a fan of nu metal. Old metal yes, you know a great riff and guys that could not only shout, but who could actually sing in between all the shouting and loud guitars and despite the weight of their hair) *Redxx dives for cover whilst being attacked by hoardes of angry Slipknot fans* So I don't think I can really do much to help, sorry. I did look at a few of those pages though and nothing looked untoward to me, although he/she does seem to like changing the actual lyrics and replacing them with "x12" "x4", etc. (which would bug me). Also changing complete words for the slang abbreviated versions (ending in an apostrophe). They sure get around a bit though. Is it always the same pages they are changing? What happens if you don't immediately correct/change them?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, some of the changes are as you mentioned, fairly minor, but other edits are completely bonkers. Changing words like "women" to read "teachers" on a couple of different songs, removing swear words on some songs and adding them in others, and removing words so that the phrase doesn't make grammatical sense any more. (And yes, sometimes songs don't make sense grammatically, but I've listened to the songs on GoEar, and the edits are often a bit bonkers. Example.) I'm just tired of having to decide which edits are good and which are bogus. History has shown that 3 out of 4 are bogus. And the good edits are usually like what you mentioned. If I don't immediately correct/change them, (and block the IP address), then usually they go on a rampage of bad edits. It's like they test the waters to see if they get caught, try a few more later, and then go hog wild. Frustrating. I've left messages, I've told them to log in so that a dialogue could take place (I'm much less likely to block a registered & talking user than a non-talking IP user), but with no response. I went to do a WhoIs lookup, and the IP addresses are all based in Richardson, Texas, here in the states. So....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes..that's Yanks for you ;-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 00:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
in case you didn't quite get it, that was payback for "mealy mouthed Brits" haa haa

Here's a question for you.. Edit

Who would you opt for as the "Original Artist"? Roger Miller or Kris Kristofferson?
Janis_Joplin:Me_And_Bobby_McGee, Kris Kristofferson:Me_And_Bobby_McGee, Wikipedia article about the song.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Roger Miller. First to record it, gets the credit. Most people think it's by Joplin, but it isn't really. (Well, it is by Joplin, but she's not the original artist, just the most famous.)   Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:32, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
No dear boy, I meant Kris Kristofferson....who wrote and recorded it...OR Roger Miller?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:38, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
First to record it, not write it. You can't cover a written can perform it or record it, but you can't cover it.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:52, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
OK so it makes no odds that this is actually Kristofferson's song, a song he wrote and performed/recorded himself?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 18:57, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Because he wasn't the first to record it. He wrote it as a songwriter for Roger Miller and then afterward when he was signed as a performing artist, he recorded it himself. It's like John Denver and Leaving on a Jet Plane. He wrote it and the Mitchell Trio recorded it (he was a member), and then Peter, Paul & Mary made it a hit, and then later he re-recorded it as a solo artist. Technically he covered his own song from when he was in the Mitchell Trio. So, it is a Mitchell Trio cover.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. I just had to be sure :-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Interesting... Edit

Yes, I thought you might find this interesting... *click*  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 00:05, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I suppose that such a person could be directed to Gold pages?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
My thoughts exactly. We shall have to incorporate this in Help pages..or possibly elsewhere..  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:55, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia has a Featured Articles section. Maybe LW's Page Ranking could too? We have featured songs and albums, but my understanding is that this is genearally about the music itself. A Page Ranking Featured section might provide examples of good pages based on editing. Song of the Day honors artists, but this would feature editors (although not necessarily one in particular).
A Featured Articles section could provide examples of the inclusion of all necessary templates (i.e. a page that has all its awards and links listed properly), or collaboration between users (talk pages where the lyrics are discussed? Examples of successful mediation between people who disagree on lyrics?), or of properly formatting the lyrics themselves (proper spelling, line breaks, properly introducing transitions between artists). This might or might not be a new page, it could just be a few pages listed in the help section. Just an idea. I'd be glad to help out, of course. team atalkctrb 23:37, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I reckon you just talked yourself into a job team a ;). And I was also thinking that if examples of my pages are plastered all over the place, more users might just get to understand exactly what "perfection" means here at LW and strive to attain the same high standards ;)... ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh no! Well, I'll look into it - I've found myself looking at a lot of other pages for examples, so I guess I might as well make a list of some examples, or figure out what the criteria of a good page are. And, it will give me an excuse to make more templates. If I look hard enough, maybe I will be able to learn something about your superior editing skills... and humility, of course... As a start, do you think you could post links to a few of the pages you edit that you think are the best examples, whether of your work or others? team atalkctrb @02:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Hee hee Pages ranked Gold (I've not checked them though) ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 02:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Disney Edit you decide please - My original post and Rumpleteazer's response. We will abide by the judges decision ;) Thanks!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I am weak. The whole Disney thing just makes my knees quiver. I admit it freely. There is likely so much that I would change that it isn't even funny.
Level 1: The master Disney page - Disney
  1. Non-Disney things should be removed. Jetix, Touchstone, ABC, & Miramax? That's stretching things a bit.
  2. I honestly wonder what would happen if all Disney films were listed chronologically on this page. Would it be so super huge? I think it might be quite a nice change.
  3. All Other Songs should be on this page, not on any sub-pages, unless properly categorized (Aladdin Other Songs on the Aladdin page, etc.) The Disney Animated Films page has an Other Songs list, for example, that shouldn't be there. Either fully categorized, or on the main page.
  4. Instead of separating and linking the misc. Disney categories to different pages, a link to a Disney Miscellaneous page might be good for those songs not in a Disney movie release. (Theme park songs, TV shows, etc.) The categories could still be in separate divisions on that page
Level 2: Movie pages - Disney:Aladdin (1992) (although technically not an album page, the year of release would be needed to differentiate between versions, such as 101 Dalmatians & The Parent Trap)
  1. Here I would include the soundtrack to the movie (many have official soundtracks that shouldn't have "Disney" as the artist, but just "Aladdin: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack (1992)") and lists of the various songs in non-English languages. Basically, treat this page as an artist page.
  2. "Aladdin" (unless there is an actual artist named Aladdin, of course) should redirect here.
  3. If non-English versions have official released soundtracks, then those soundtracks could be given their own soundtrack link and track list here.
  4. Non-English songs should be listed as was done at Disney:Aladdin (1992).
Level 3: Soundtrack pages - Aladdin: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack (1992)
  1. Just like the usual soundtrack page.
Level 4: Song pages - Disney:A Whole New World
  1. Should, optimally, link to other non-English versions (and conversely, non-English should link also to the English version)
I know that I'm forgetting some things I saw. It's just such a huge mish-mash. Other editors have taken a shot at organizing that page, and I've given guidance in the past, but it's a huge job. Monumental. Gigantic. Horrific. Nightmarish. I know you'll have more questions for me, and I'm not sure I really even answered your original question. Good luck!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
You're not wrong. Rfl. Ok I think I got most of that. Basically you'd like Disney formatted more in line with rest of LW. The only thing I am confused about is level 3. Is level 3 just for where we have the full set of songs in another language? What if we don't know if it's officially released or merely someone's translation? What if we only have a couple of songs in each different language?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Level 3 is for actual CDs/albums/soundtracks. It includes only what is on the album. Any misc. songs in non-English languages should be on the Level 2 page, as was done on the Disney:Aladdin (1992) page, listed and separated by language.
I guess that I AM pretty much saying that it should be more in line with the rest of LW. (Old habits are hard to break?) The biggest difference is that there is the Master Page (all bow down to the Master Page!) Disney, and linked from that list is what is equal to "Artist pages", such as Disney:Aladdin (1992), even though the page title is in an album-like format.
Have you seen anything else that might be unusual with the Disney items?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
ADDENDUM: OH! It would be nice to show which Level 2 pages had Non-English lyrics listed (or entire non-English soundtracks. Currently, on the Disney Animated Films page, there is a separate listing, which is okay, but if we are to have those songs listed on the Level 2 page, as opposed to on their own page, I think some sort of small icon after the Level 2 link would be better. Ideally, there should be a string of icons, one per language. Perhaps the country's flag, as on our Main Page? If not, then I suppose just the wiki-code for each language could be used (DE for German, ES for Spanish, etc.), but I think that the icons would be "prettier". Pretty! I feel pretty!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Graphics? Icons? Pretty pictures... Flags? Want me to wave mine from over here? So when you gonna start putting this all into operation then, big man? ;)
I dunno, I had just about got my head round Part 1 and now you hit me with Part 2! I'm still trying to work my way through my watchlist...I doubt you'll be surprised to know that it's ...err...kind of got...err.. a bit out of hand. I have tried before knocking stuff off but it never really made much odds because more just keeps going on.., or I got distracted, or maybe there's some other reason... Dunno. But I am committed to resolving this and until I finish I won't be attacking any blinkin' Disney pages! But when I have finished I will turn my attentions and Rumpleteazer's too (assuming she is still willing to assist me) sorting Disney, hopefully once and for all.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 16:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
"Addendum" like that word don't you? Yeah, I'm getting to like it too. So I think I'll try it out for size and make that my word for next week ;)
Yup, Rumpleteazer's still here and happy to help. I'm not great with coding on here yet, but I can do most of the things I need to do. If you guys leave me a message on my talk page of what you need me to do, I'll be happy to give you a hand. --Rumpleteazer 18:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok I'm ready to delete this particular page >>>Touchstone_Pictures..the only thing that bothers me about doing that is the person who spent time compiling it.. Yeah, yeah, I know. Delete?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 02:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete. Abandoned. One link. Creator hasn't been on in nearly a year.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   11:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Disambig pages Edit

Question: Can you give me a quick lesson in disambig pages please? By which I primarily mean:

btw the party's over at my place..but be warned they're a noisy lot ;)
Okay...let me preface this by saying that I don't think that my way of thinking is the way that other admins think. like you hadn't figured that out already.... The way that I have done it in the past is to have the main (non-add-on) artist be whichever artist with that name was the most "major". Essentially, whichever was the most known - although if that isn't really known than I use whichever has the most releases. Then the others have a small add-on like you used. Often this is the country (UK) or genre (Rap). Then I put an info box ({{Info}}) at the top of all pages, with a note about the other artists with that similar name.
As for the albums, songs, etc. I use the same Artist Name for all works by that artist. So "Coma (PL):Album Title (Year)", "Coma (PL):Song Name", etc. This is because of the reason that you gave, although it's also because I like the uniformity. The Footer info, of course, doesn't need the add-on, but it helps for the upper-page template links. Other admins (I'm not sure who) prefer the "Coma" page to be the disambiguation page. After that, I'm not sure what they do. I think they leave the artist name alone, but just have the main Artist page have the add-on. So any back links to the artist basically go to the disamb. page and the user has to choose the correct artist page to click.
Help any?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:32, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
If I may jump in totally uninvited ;) How about when two artists have the same name David Wilcox. TIA ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 08:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
That's basically what we're talking about. Personally, I would move all of the Canadian David Wilcox's items to David Wilcox (Canada), as the American artist appears to have more regular releases and is more active currently. Then a note linking to the other should be placed on each page, as mentioned above.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Ringtone Ads? Edit

"Send "..." Ringtone to your Cell Phone"

Is this really wanted? This really is the MOST annoying ad I've EVER seen =O It's really poor to claim to be "a free site which is a source where anyone can go to get reliable lyrics for any song from any artist without being hammered by invasive ads" and then insert THAT advertisement on every page. I can't believe it..! Chris 22:36, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree!

JimCubb 04:59, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Merge? Edit

There are only 2,517 pages left in the articles to be merged. (Sorry, I could not convince it to be a link.) I did not bother to check who tagged them but the few that I did check have no talk pages. They should keep various admins busy for a little while.

I am going back to the language problem. Have fun!

JimCubb 04:57, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


Rfl made me laugh had only been there 51 weeks ;) And Ok I know it ain't wrong, but I never create pages with underscores (I'm working on saving energy  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 00:18, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Glad my utter disbelief was able to give you some amusement.  :-p I guess I could remove the underscores, but it's technically the way it should be done. Why give away all of the sweet shortcuts us old-timers have?  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:25, 25 October 2008 (UTC)#
Noted ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

When you got a minute.. Edit

Could you take a look at this page please Help:Contents/Getting Started/Additional Help, only I arrived upon it on my travels today and actually sat and read it. After which I concluded that some genuine messages for help had got left on the page along the way, as it just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. Whatever, I think it needs a 30 minute Kiefer special ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

They were all so SUPER OLD that if they didn't get an answer already, then they either found out the answer on their own, gave up, or haven't been back. They've been removed as they weren't supposed to be on there and I've updated the page a little bit. PS: Miscellenous????? :-)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   18:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Well done on the page. As for miscellaneous? Yes, I did wonder if perhaps you had got it wrong ...;-) Rflma (quite literally).  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 19:09, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
That never happened.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:16, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Haa haa haa..too late pal!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to intrude on the conversation, but... perhaps we need a Help Desk of some kind? I know everyone knows everyone around here, and I have no problems myself, but I wonder if a lot of new users know where to ask, if they don't know any admins. Personally, I was intimidated about asking questions in the Community Portal when I first joined, and that might not be the right place for them anyway. Luckily, Redxx welcomed me, and answered a bunch of questions on my talk page team atalkctrb 06:32, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

That's a pretty good idea. I am wondering if that will spread the help a bit thin, however. Hrrrrm. Possibly not. If the LyricWiki:Help Desk was the place for questions, as opposed to the Community Portal, leaving the CP for discussions about site improvement, etc., then that would likely be a good thing. I'll bring it up to the other admins and see what they think, since they would be the ones putting the page on their watchlists, so that questions would get answered. Thanks for the excellent suggestion!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:11, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. I think it's a great idea team a! Can me and Kiefer go back to playing silly b's now? (it's our particular area of expertise - hee hee) ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:08, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
I would definitely be willing to help setting up LyricWiki:Help Desk (it will probably need a few templates of some kind), as well as watching it and responding to requests. Hopefully this will allow some people who might not feel that their comment is worthy of the community portal to become engaged, rather than losing interest. And yes, Redxx, I will but out now :) team atalkctrb 05:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Bureaucrat?! Edit

Congratulations on this, by the way. I've been rather busy and haven't been around much, but should have noticed anyways.
- teknomunk (talk,E,,A) 12:46, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Glad to see you back, BTW.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:11, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Phew...!! Edit

I was having a major panic there... I kept checking the recent changes and I was on his tail but to no avail. I almost rang the CIA ;) You can all blame me for this. Sorry :(  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

{{Hometown}}, yes? If so, I used my limited template knowledge to slap that down. Poor Aquatiki...must not be his week, either. thank goodness I'm not the only one....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Rfl..Yes well done you! Aqua edited it after you, but looks like you both did different things so here's hoping. (After he'd done that I told him you had edited it in case he hadn't noticed). Anyway I'm off to me bed now panic is over. Thanks again for catching that. I really didn't know what to do.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:24, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

You know how brilliant you were last night... Edit

Well...can you help me out here please..{{AllmusicAlbum}} & {{AllmusicAlbum/doc}} (don't worry there's only about 5 links to this template..I know..I's one I created)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Lol I think we both hit on it and corrected two separate bits at exact same time. I had a include only in wrong place. Thank you.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:56, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Glad it's fixed!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I can't quite remember how it went and I won't be offended... Edit

Kiefer KieferTalk KieferE

or you could have this one...

Kiefer KieferTalk EsperanzaIcon

or you could upload any icon and change it ...

...but personally I always did envy your green one... It says "This guy's got style!"

 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 02:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

It was the first E. Bold, Hulk-green. Mischko, I think, had the more elegant, serifed E. Does this mean that all those old sigs display properly again? If so...sweet!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Rfl@Bold, Hulk-green. Yes, I fixed Mischko's and yours, but I had to make a few amendments. Anyway, if you do want to change your signature for a more graphical version, just copy and paste the code for one of these into your User:Kiefer/Signature page, save and hey presto - new graphical links! But please save your lovely green one as back up in case anything like this ever happens again.
Few other things you should know:
  • To change the graphic, just change the address in relevant parameter.
  • You have to enter the full external address (obtained via right click, 'Properties'), even if it is an internal file.
  • You can't change the display size of the graphic, so ensure the one you select is the size you want.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC) P.S. hee hee

Re: KissEdit

Yeah, I got it from Alive!. From what I know, the song itself isn't different; from what I can tell, the Gene Simmons stuff is just getting the audience involved, asking them to sing along. --Cubs Fan2007 05:28, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, that explains it. Somehow the Gene Simmons stuff needs to be marked as Alive! only (*asterisk it with a notation below the closing lyric tag?) or perhaps a new page with a (Live) add-on should be created. What do you think?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   07:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Admin Edit

Yes, I have been busy... My new job doesn't afford me the time to be here as much as I was. So it is best for now to be listed as inactive. I am going to make more of an effort to be active on the weekends and such; I miss working on it. There are a few of "my" artists that need work! LOL

I am curious as to the new changes you speak of. Sounds interesting.

Thanks for the message.

--Jeff Saul (T-C-A-E) 05:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

It's good to hear from you! As for what's been going on, we have a "admins-only" discussion page at LyricWiki:Administrators Portal. Just a way to keep each other updated on things that are going on so that we don't have to post notes on each other's talk pages all the time. (Although that still happens a great deal. Half of my watchlist is filled with talk page updates, it seems.) We also have page ratings going on, new servers, and various other fun things too. It's hard for me to keep up with what everyone is doing. There's even a new LyricWiki:Bot Portal for the bot creators. Good stuff. Do what you can when you can, and let me know when you feel less "inactive"!  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   05:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: RadioheadEdit

Thanks for the comments. I am not the originator of the page, and do not intend to be the watcher of it, either. So changes to the layout are fine with me. I'm mainly focusing on some cosmetic changes to the lyrics and adding some links and artwork along the way. I agree with how you placed "My Iron Lung"- and if I continue going up the chronological order and listen to Radiohead's collection (which I might); I may make simlar changes. --Redrkr 08:42, 6 November 2008 (EST)

Thanks! Whatever you can do is great!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   17:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Recent Batch Moves and DeletionsEdit

LOL, While you were having a beer, I was helping my neighbour build a fence! But 4 days ago I posted this note and your comment was all the response I got, and not because of the note. How does the Category:Articles to be merged look like now? I was looking for a solution for the entire cupboard, rather than just a jar. cheers and thanks for the input :) ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 01:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC) I also posted about deletion of redundant redirects and content page counts, and was hoping that you may be able to shed some light...

One of the problems with so many things going on and so much chatter is that things get missed. Probably 2 out of 3 (well, once bot changes are removed) changes on my watchlist every time I come on are talk pages and portals. Honestly, I can't keep up with all that's going on. Aquatiki blatantly asked for help with the ArtistHeader template on that same page, and I was the only response. So, there you go.
Redundant redirects? No such thing. Content page counts? I'm not sure what you mean. Elaborate, please.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
∑ Content Pages
The Lost Songs
But most important of all, from sheer curiosity, I'd like to to learn why lw keeps redundant info... "We have three places where the Song is defined: Page name, Song Template & SongFooter. Same goes for Artist, it's already defined in page name, why again in Song Template and Song Footer separately" from [5] and how all these pieces get referenced here and there on lw.
I can't imagine mergeto template removal can be any harder than dupe itune -rm. cheers ∃cho⚡ierr∀ ()06:24, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Is there a list of all pages affected in this way? I am looking back and there appear to be some issues. Take Vicente Fernandez, which was just redirected. The mergeto template was on the ARTIST page but no other pages. I guess I should ask: what did you tell your bot to do, exactly?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 07:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
remove the [6] the mergeto template and redirect to Correct Artist Name Vicente Fernández, Incorrect artist name songs are in Orphaned pages. What's missing? Janitor should follow the redirect and add the orphans to the OS list of correct artist page... ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 08:04, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I couldn't agree with you more Kiefer, I am really finding it impossible keeping up with all the changes people are wanting to make at the moment and because of this I know that like you I too am missing stuff. I think this has got more to do with people not commenting Echo, than lack of interest, I really do. And if we don't comment? Liklihood is that before we have a chance to consider, it will suddenly become procedure! teknomunk hardly ever comments on stuff so I don't know if this is indicative that he's having a worse time of it than us. I have even considered taking an extended holiday I'm getting that frustrated by it all. I even wrote my goodbye speech (you think I'm joking?). I have a sneaking suspicion we aren't the only ones too. Seems to me things are being rushed and I do not see this, nor all these changes, as necessarily being a good thing. Yes there probably are a few things that could be improved upon but not that many!! We haven't even got Page Ranking fully operational yet. I think we should concentrate our efforts on that before mucking around with new templates and the like involving site wide changes. This is by far and away the main problem we got at the moment, more so even than batch moves and artist headers. Aquatiki has set a page up for future projects. I have a feeling from what he wrote that he may be feeling the same way too. I don't want to curb anyone's enthusiasm but I do think we need to calm this all down a bit. For the good of the site and for everyone's sake. ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I am beginning to agree with Red, here. Things are a little too hectic, and existing projects are being half done in an excitement and being left to be finished later. I'd like to see current projects finished now and future projects started later.
The only thing that I have in mind is the best for the site, and making sure that previous hard work isn't washed away or done in vain.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 18:02, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Wow, I thought I was the only one feeling overwhelmed and a bit lost. Glad/Sorry to see that I'm not.
Okay, on to the points of discussion. I see that one of the concerns are that songs that aren't in the correct location (do not have the correct pagename), but which do have redirects pointing to them are therefore not on the Lonely Pages list. Hrm. Is this the case? Does a redirect pointing to a page automatically disqualify it from Lonelydom. As I am writing this, I don't know. I will experiment.
Well, I removed a song from 112 which had a redirect to it. It didn't appear on the Orphaned list. I redirected a song that was on the list, and it disappeared. (I'm a little perplexed by a few Other Songs pages that include accented characters and why they are there, even though they are deleted, but I digress...). If this is the case that pages that have redirects aimed at them are not considered Orphaned, then perhaps this is something to bring up to Sean. I don't know the ins and outs of what settings might be available for the Orphaned pages, but perhaps this is a simple case of redefining what makes a page an orphaned. "Nothing points here that isn't a redirect" vs. "Nothing points here."
As for why the # of content pages changes so drastically, I don't know. I seem to recall this sort of things happening before, so you may want to do a little searching as to it's cause. (Most likely was discussed in the Community Portal or on Sean's talk page.) I would doubt that any shrinking of a list, such as SNLI would affect things, as that isn't (as far as I know) a "physical" page, but a server-created list.
As for the redundancy: Pagename is all initial caps, SongFooter can be "normal" caps, for artists like t.A.T.u., which if T.A.T.u. were sent would come back in some cases with an error, I believe. (Or in the case of soundtracks, Various Artists can be used.) The Song template doesn't use the song title, so I'm confused as to your meaning there.
Well, I've experimented and commented for what in real time is over an hour, and I've somewhere to go. I will return later to perhaps comment more if I have missed/forgotten something.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the responses Kiefer. This page seems to be the REAL admin portal. And thanks to Aqua for the work on Artist Header, whenever that is fully approved and applied site wide. My other q is about redirects, we have oodles of them and Artist redirect should satisfy most (but not all) cases. Is [List Redirects] a true count of redirects? I thought Total Content pages goes down when [Mellencamp John Cougar] pages (and the like) are redirected (dunno why all those redirects can not be handled via a single artist redirect?), and is that the only valid reason for Content page counts dropping drastically. And as a comment to all, If there exists a list of things that really needs to get done ASAP, I'd like to know how far down that list is SNLI & Artists missing fLetter, Sesame Street and Artcles to be merged. cheers ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 02:08, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I referenced the comments I made here in the Admin Portal yesterday Echo, see LyricWiki_talk:Administrators_Portal#.7B.7BArtistHeader.7D.7D. I have also commented on some projects in the Community Portal too. I just wanted to comment on Kiefer saying:
Honestly, I can't keep up with all that's going on.
And yes, you have been doing a tremendous job, just as you always do, so please don't take what I have said personally. It isn't you. It's us. All of us are guilty to some extent for allowing this well not me, obviously, because as you all know I'm perfect But joking aside, I have an unbelievable amount of stress in my life and coming here has helped me deal with all that. It's also been fun. I want it to be fun again. I just felt someone needed to call time.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Part of me likes that a lot is going on. It means that things are happening and that improvements are being made, but keeping up with what everyone is doing and with all the talk going on, I am afraid sometimes that a change will take place that has repercussions that haven't been thought of. I like a moderate, steady pace to change. As the "formatting/organization/rules" guy, and with a background in Information & Library Science, I'm usually the first to notice possible hiccups to changes, but I have to trust in my fellow admins. I always trust everyone's motives, dedication, and enthusiasm, but I don't even trust my knowledge of the intricacies of LyricWiki and my ability to not make mistakes every now and then. (Not all of us can be perfect, after've already got that job, yes?  :-] ) Everyone has their projects and communication (even with the Admins Portal) can be a challenge, that's all I'm saying.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
List Redirects should be a straightforward list of all redirects. (Wikipedia Link:Help:Special_page) I made a redirect at [[4Him:Measure of a Man]], however, and it (or the other "4 Him" redirects which I know exist, such as [[4 Him:Measure Of A Man]]) don't show up. That may be a server issue. I wish I knew better how things were set up, as that might give us a clue to some of these mysteries. As I understand it, one server is dedicated to API requests, and one is for the main online users, with editing going on and such, but there's something else involved, too, with caching and so on. Perhaps the datafile for the list isn't a made-as-requested list, but is a list generated once a week or on some sort of schedule. Still a bit of a mystery.
I would imagine that all "Mellencamp John Cougar" page requests could be automatically redirected if the MediaWiki program allowed it. Perhaps it does, but then that would require extra server action each request. Instead of "1. find the file" and then "2. follow the redirect to get the new file", it would be "1. find the file that begins with everything up to the colon" then "2. is that page a redirect?" then if so "3a. replace portion up to the colon with new redirect information" then "4a. find the new file name" and if no then "3b. find the original file." The redirect uses very little server space and very little server power. During the first server upgrade (that I was a part of anyway), I remember Sean saying basically "make all kinds of redirects!" In fact, he used to cruise the failed SOAP requests page fairly regularly to turn into redirects what failed requests he could find.
There really isn't a list of things that need to be done ASAP. Some projects are more "useful" than others, I suppose. Personally, I like projects that help fill in information that we ask for in templates. Things that help move a page up the ranking scale. SNLI is a great project. I think that it is great, especially for those who are say, looking for songs in a specific language. If I was someone from Norway looking for only songs in Norwegian, looking under that language category would definitely be something that I would want to do. fLetter helps to organize things better, but I'm just not really sure how often a person would use the fLetter categories. Sesame Street and similar are good when an editor has time to spend, but perhaps not enough time for a major project. It's the type of project that can be worked on and dropped whenever an editor's time dries up. Then, later it can be picked up and restarted. That's an "everyman" project. Anyone can pick it up and do what they can. The bot-type stuff is more a "one person" job. Someone has to pick up the challenge and work on it until it is completed, I think. As for Articles to be Merged, that's a clean-up type job. Good to do on a regular schedule, I think. Although, if teknomunk makes a few changes in the Batch Move, it might become unnecessary.
I think that's it for now. I'm going to try to check over my watchlist now!  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
OK, I just got back from work (so I had to miss out on all the good conversation here) and there were a few things that I wanted to say myself.
First: am sorry for getting a little something or other early today/last night I was freaked out between the mergeto/from pages to redirects fix that you did and Aquatiki's idea of completely revamping {{Song}} (Which, I am not going to lie, gives me a case of the screaming willies. No offense to Aq on that one).
What I would still like to get from Echo is a compendious list of the pages effected by the script. The list given already is all artists that were explicitly moved. What I need is the rest of the artists effected, where just the songs might have been moved. 2 good examples: A whole bunch of pages were bot-redirected involving Strokes to The Strokes (I noticed that because I like The Strokes) and Trans Siberian Orchestra to Trans-Siberian Orchestra. If you don't want to sort that yourself, would there be a log file txt or at least a time range for your bot's contributions? For our sakes next time, when doing a part 1 of 2 kind of thing please track the effected pages so that somebody else can easily do part 2.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 05:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Die Ärzte Edit

Hello, someone has messed up the Songs of Die Ärzte at the album Jazz ist anders Economy. It's because of the User Demotape. Could you fix that anyhow? I tried to but he really made a lot of things. -- Chris 18:22, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually a little confused, because according to Wikipedia and Discogs, those are the titles according to the CD for the altered versions of those songs, not "Original Name Economy", as you have put. Can you clarify? Because I can help, but according to what I've researched, things were fine except for the pagename capitalization, which I am fixing.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   18:57, 8 November 2008 (UTC) and
And well, haven't you noticed WP was edited by someone unregistered?
I hardly can imagine that Die Ärzte would ever make titles like "Penis Enlargement***CHEAP Vigara***Buy stocks now!!***" - What's on the booklet is definitively the original songs. The messed up songs are only saved as the titles are on CD (your Discogs link says so). Maybe I'll ask someone who might have the CD this week. So long, Chris 21:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
K I had a bit of time and was curious about this album. Regrettably my German isn't that good :(. However, from what I was able to find out it looks to me that although the cover listed the titles of the songs as appears on Wikipedia (yes, including the Viagra ad - rfl), the actual songs were (comedic??) versions of the same songs on the regular album. This could explain why on YouTube all the songs have same titles as on the regular album, just with the addition "Economy". I may be wrong but this is how it looks to me. The Economy Edition was sold on tour. German Wikipedia. Hope that helps.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 22:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Note Restoration Edit

Sorry about that! cheers ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () EchoSierra 16:29, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Die Kleingeldprinzessin Und Die Stadtpiraten Hmm? Edit

From what I can tell by the history you created this Artist page from some songs that had been posted by an anonymous user. However all the songs on the page list the artist as Kleingeldprinzessin. Should the two be merged or something? JimCubb

I didn't make the page, but I did move it so that the filename was correctly capitalized. I did the same for the song links, but didn't change the Artist name of the links because I wasn't 100% sure that the name was correct. The German wiki has a page entitled "Die Kleingeldprinzessin Und Die Stadtpiraten", but the band also appears to be sometimes just mentioned as "Kleingeldprinzessin". Since no fix has shown up since then, I have moved all appropriate pages to "Die Kleingeldprinzessin Und Die Stadtpiraten" and redirected "Kleingeldprinzessin."    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Protecting much used templates Edit

How about it? I thought it best to "delegate" this one to you. 6x9 raised this very important point. See here.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

RE: Sum 41Edit

I removed songs that are listed tehre that aren't by Sum 41. And obviosly you don't own the album, because on teh back of the god damn album it says "Grab the Devil by the horns and **** him up the ***" That's the freaking name of the song. But i don't care anymore, i tried to help, but this fail site doesn't want to be correct. They would rather have incorrect information than truth. Congrats. LukeTheSpook 19:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

And the name of the demo tape is 1998 demo tape. that's what it says ON THE PHYSICAL TAPE Rock out with your cock out was a name created by fans to refer to it before we actually had a copy if it, one showed up one ebay and nowhere on the cover does it say Rock out with your Cock out. LukeTheSpook 19:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
And you also deleted there new song "Always" LukeTheSpook 19:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

for teh songs that arne't by sum 41 (they didn't even ever cover songs by this name: )

  1. Not By Them
  2. Take Me Tonight
  3. What I Did Wrong
  4. Whatever
  5. Just Words
  6. Way Away (that's a yellowcard song)

Bleed LukeTheSpook 19:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely, it does say "Grab the Devil by the Horns and **** Him up the ***", that's why it shouldn't say "Grab the Devil by the Horns and Fuck Him up the Ass", as you changed it to say. Glad we can agree on that.
As for the demo tape. Does it say on the tape "1998 Demo Tape" as the official title? If you have a picture reference or something that would be great and I will change it. Wikipedia has a picture of the tape, however, and it has no such title.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
sorry that i completely over-reacted. But shouldn't the songs that aren't by sum 41 be removed from the page. and add back in Always, there new b-side. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by LukeTheSpook (talkcontribs).
No big deal. Do you have any idea who those songs might be by? (Often times songs are attributed to incorrect artists because they "sound" like they are by the band, even if they are by someone else.) If they are by someone else, I'd rather redirect them to the correct artist's song. (Like Sum 41:Way Away is really Yellowcard:Way Away?) Way Away has been redirected and removed, and Take Me Tonight has been deleted and removed.
Since things seem to have calmed down, I'm going to "release" the page, so if you'd like to re-add the new song Always that would be fine. I'm not sure about what it may be a b-side to, but it appears to be on the new Japan-only greatest hits compilation 8 Years of Blood, Sake, and Tears: The Best of Sum 41 2000-2008. If you'd like to add that tracklist to the page, that would be great. Just put something like * Japanese-only compilation album to be released on November 26, 2008. under the album link, so that visitors will know its origin. Thanks!   Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:49, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, i have no clue who the other songs are by. LukeTheSpook 03:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

RE: Watcher Edit

Thanks for telling me. See ya later!ZT 14:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Instrumental: blank lineEdit

There is now an additional blank line above "This song is an instrumental" when you put {{Instrumental}} between lyric tags. I assume it's because of the blank line between </noinclude> and {{Banner... here. Could you check and, if possible, fix this? Thanks! -- 6x9 (Talk) 20:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, removed extra spaces. Fixed, I hope?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Yep, fixed. Thanks! -- 6x9 (Talk) 02:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Any job that requires 2 taps on the backspace key, I'm all for!  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 23:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

RE: Dire Straits:Romeo And Juliet Edit

Terribly sorry, I had absolutely no idea, I guess I ought to have checked beforehand but it seemed like such an obvious error to me that I didn't bother to, so thanks for correcting the article. I have to say, that is rather a baffling choice of word not to mention frustrating, I really prefer words in lyrics to actually mean something! Some blog somewhere mentioned that it may have been transcribed wrong in the lyric booklet but that is rather far-fetched I guess. If only I could get a confirmation from Mark Knopfler himself in an interview somewhere then I'd be able to rest easy! Feudonym 00:41, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

It certainly is a bit strange, but he does choose some unusual phrases/words from time-to-time. I know that "Industrial Disease" has a few unique items, as well.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Further...Talk:Dire Straits:Romeo And Juliet. (Should make you laugh too).  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 05:24, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


Kiefer, I appreciate you letting me know - the reason I changed it to one word, was firstly on the back of my One Beat CD itself it does seem to appear as one word "Faraway". I couldn't find a track listing on the official discograpy page just a picture of the album. On the kill rock stars store page it is listed as one word, and finally it's one word on the allmusic page. So I guess it depends on your source. I will of course leave it as is for now, I just wanted to give you my justification. --Ptha 17:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hrm. That is unusual that so many sources have it the other way, including the News section of the artist web site. But your sources certainly trump mine! I'll move things back to the way that you had it. Thank you for your persistence & care with this. It's good to get this absolutely right and you had it absolutely right.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Level 1 headers Edit

Can you explain the reasoning behind the "reserved for page title only"? NIN is an example of an artist whose releases fit extremely nicely into "bins", marked by eras, with one major album per era and multiple minor releases revolving in some manner around that era's major release. While I understand the need for having article style guidelines, the primary motive should still be usability, and Nine Inch Nails has much to gain from showing the separations between eras (especially in the table of contents).

When I went through, I had originally started with the eras at level 2 instead of level 1, however this bumps the albums to level 3, which has no separator, which breaks usability much, much more. --Aikon- 05:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

In addition: I am aware that albums should not be split into categories (e.g. Live, EP, etc.), however in this case, the eras and halos are actually part of the chronological definition of each album, and so is keeping with the artist style guide. --Aikon- 05:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
The "reserved for page title only" is a wiki tradition, and one that we keep here. (As I recall, it was found to mess up some functionality with the API.) To help with this, I have created a template for such things: {{Caption}}. It looks like this:

Pretty Hate Machine era (1989–1990)

Pretty Hate Machine era (1989–1990)

It's a bit plain, perhaps, but it should do the job, and can be improved upon by some of the more adept template-makers here if the need exists. I hope this solution is satisfactory.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Cool, alternate solutions! I didn't know there was an issue with the API. I'll throw it up on the page when I get a chance and do some tweaking. Thanks! --Aikon- 02:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hmm.. works pretty well for when you're skimming through the page, but it doesn't show up in the TOC. Do you know if there's a way to force an entry into the TOC without explicitly using = level 1 = tags? --Aikon- 02:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
That is the drawback, that the caption doesn't appear in the TOC. I don't believe that there is any way around this, unfortunately, as I believe the TOC is created through the use of the header notations. So, it doesn't help the TOC, but it still separates the page for those who are browsing and aren't looking to go to a specific album from the TOC. Sorry that the work-around isn't perfect, but on the other hand, you can use the template without loading up the TOC to super-human length.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:59, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Album Template Reformat Edit

I haven't seen you post about the proposed edit to the album template, and I'd like to make sure your voice is heard, especially considering the extent of your experience and editorship on this site. Any thoughts or criticisms are welcome. team atalkctrb 03:39, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Everything looks good, as far as I can see. I haven't had anything to input, which I guess is a good thing!  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:02, 24 November 2008 (UTC) what do you think... Edit

Re new Artist Header  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 02:09, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I think the trio of Aqua, 6x9 & Team a are a good template-making combo. I'll leave a note about the particular item, however.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
As usual for me recently I didn't explain myself properly, sorry. What I meant was I think your input on how best to apply Artist Header on such pages would be very useful.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 11:29, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Bad Bot Edit Edit

Thanks, Rick Springfield:Jessie's Girl slipped with a bad language param too. fixed the code. cheers ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 06:32, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

A call to arms, of sortsEdit

I am putting the changes to song through a vote over at the community portal, I'd like to see all of the admin in on this one.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 09:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Good Call aka He Really Still Hasn't Gotten It aka Jim, You're Totally Missing The Bleeding PointEdit

I think the title says what I mean, but thank you for confronting Jim about his behavior. Even almost completely estranged from him (as we didn't work on the same projects) I saw that he was pretty rude and combative. His final statements will I think cause many of us to scratch our heads in befuddlement at just how off target he could be, but that is how some are.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 04:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, as I was writing you a note about your edit to his talk page (essentially "eh?") when I got your notice. Some people just spiral when they don't get what they want when they want it. And he spiraled. Hard. It obviously wasn't the first time. Sucks to be the bad cop, though. He had some good ideas (if you got past his condescending tone), and did notice things that needing fixing/adjusting/etc. (although not always RIGHT NOW, as he wanted), but didn't, as teachers like to say, get along well with others. R.I.P.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   05:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. Very well handled Kiefer!!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I thank you also for confronting him. Jim was a good worker, I didn't mind anything he was working with, but he couldn't realize his priorities weren't everyone else's priorities... I did find this statement to be a bit ironic: "People who think they understand what they are doing are a major irritation to those of us who do understand what they are doing." He has been here for two months, while some of us have been here two years or longer. Either way, he had to make a choice whether to stay and stop being a dick or leave altogether. So, I'm sad to see him go, but I definitely won't miss his attitude... --WillMak050389 21:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I think Will confronted him sufficiently strongly on my talk page weeks ago, but Jim didn't catch on. O well.. ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 22:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Pagenaming Policies Edit

What about this rule at this page?

""The Album or Song page name should use only the title written in the native script, with no romanized version of the title added. Instead, add {{JaTitle}} with the appropriate romanization and translation in the song header.""

It does contradict what is written in here -, though. However, the explanation on this page is rather vague, grouping the songs and albums with the artist names.

What I did is only fixing the pages that were changed incorectly just couple of days ago, that is, deleted romanization that someone added, from the title and left just the original script. Some of the songs that you have changed were also written in katakana, not simply in romaji.

Finally, as for capitalization, I followed this rule: "In this example, the first letter is made capitalized for LyricWiki's purposes, but the remainder of the artist's name remains in its official format. So, if an album was named OdDly CaPiTaLIzeD, the name should be capitalized exactly as shown, not changed to Oddly Capitalized." As, for example, album "jamais vu" should be written this way, and not the "Jamais Vu" Since you are the administrator, do I have the premission to change Ali Project section to the way before you reredirected all the redirected pages? Iatheia 16:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, the sad thing is that I was wrong. (Well, partially.) I looked at Help:Non-English Songs and was obviously confused by its incompleteness. You're right, the song title part isn't meant to have the romanized portion added on. I will return those pages to their previous form. (A few pages that I think that you created, however, had romanized add-ons as well. They weren't properly capitalized, but did have the add-on, so I'm not sure what to do about those. Normally, I'd ask User:Teknomunk, our resident Japanese music fan & admin, but he's busy with school and things and isn't on as often as in the past. So, I apologize again for my mis-reading of that page. I was drawn in when I saw you and another user had opposing edits, and should have researched a bit more.
The part that I am correct about, however, are the cases such as "jamais vu", which (because it is written in roman letters) should have their initial letters capitalized. The display can be lowercase, but the link to the page (and the pagename/filename) should be capitalized. This rule applies not only to the Artist portion of the pagename, but the Album or Song portion of the pagename as well.
If you come back to the site before I do and wish to return pages to their original location without the romanized add-ons, that's fine. I'll do it when I return in a few hours, though, because it was my misinterpretation of the page. (I'll also clarify that help page too!)
There is a group that deals with Japanese artists on the site at LyricWiki:Japan. I don't know how active it is currently, since Teknomunk isn't around as much lately, but it's a nice place to get some ideas. I should have looked closer at it yesterday, as a matter of fact!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I just went ahead and fixed them, since I'm in process of adding the titles to the body of the songs anyway =) Iatheia 23:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome Kiefer!Edit

Hee hee {{RedxxWelcome}} {{Welcome/Sandbox}} and finally {{WelcomeIP/Sandbox}} (the last one was badly in need of updating, e.g. 400,000 pages of lyrics as opposed to 600,000..). The only thing I wasn't sure about was the bit about asking in the IRC Channel. In the end I decided to remove the instructions for this because although I think it's a great idea (which should be promoted at some future point), I have visited there myself a few times and there's hardly anyone there. I think teknomunk hangs out there sometimes but from whatr I could tell he doesn't tend to say very much ;). Anyway, I certainly don't feel it's a good idea to instruct people to ask for help there as things stand. Although I tested these templates out fully on your talk page (with all the various optional parameters) and all looked OK, please review both of them and release into the wild if OK. Obviously adapt in any way you want. As ever I was just doing my bit to get you started  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 14:53, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but 2 things: 1. How did the Help Desk get created without me noticing? (Signs up). 2. I think there should be a note about song moving/deletion/redirection, as that still continues to be an issue here. Besides all the recent activity on the community portal and talk pages I watch, I myself have had to tell users about this, even a user very experienced with wikis. In fact, I think Redxx told be about this when I first joined, since I did it wrong. Maybe a help page about this, linked in welcome template? 3. I fixed the top title so that it will always display the welcomed user's name, even if it is archived or doesn't appear on the user's main talk page. Also, it won't display the pagename it's used on unless it's used in the user namespace. Also, I added a comma before the user's name - for a site full of sticklers, I'm surprised this went so long without fixing! Also, the welcomer's signature and the date now appear correctly at the bottom, if applicable. If the date was provided before, it looked like the date itself was the one welcoming the new user... Oh, and 4. It looks great, Redxx! I'm going to have to change my personal welcome template now! team atalkctrb 20:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 5. I am an expert counter.
Okay, I edited my {{KieferWelcome}}. Let's see if it works correctly.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to, Kiefer!

LyricWiki is a free, editable database that has over 2,760,919 pages of lyrics! Included in that database can be songs from any genre, country, or language imaginable. Whatever you are into musically, there is likely something here for you. And if not...please add whatever you can!

If you need help getting started, check out the help pages. Actually, you might want to check them out anyway, particularly the Formatting Artists, Formatting Albums and Formatting Songs sections, to see which cool templates you can (and should) use.

If you need any assistance, you can ask for help on my talk page. Another good place to get help with specific editing questions is the Help Desk. The Help Desk is on the watch lists of the site administrators, so you are likely to get an answer fairly quickly. If you have a more general site-related question, you could place your question on the Community Portal, which is where much of the discussion about the site and planning goes on.

An important tip for new users: LyricWiki breaks some of the usual capitalization rules for artists, albums, and song titles. Please see LyricWiki:Page names for more information. These special rules apply to any language that uses Roman-styled letters, whether German, French, English, Spanish, Italian, etc., etc.

Have fun!

   Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin  

It works, but how do I get the date stamped on it? I've always wished that I could do so, but I'm a template novice. I borrow and hack and get a few things done, but it's like carving a turkey with a hatchet.... I'm letting that image soak in.... Help! (What does that added "{{{1|}}}" bit do?)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Use {{KieferWelcome|~~~~~}}. The {{{1|}}} bit means "insert the first parameter if it exists, otherwise insert nothing". Putting the date as the first parameter means the date will appear everytime there's a {{{1|}}}, but if you don't include it, it won't display an ugly {{{1}}}. Also, what do you use the "Image" parameter for? Was that copied from another template? team atalkctrb 21:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC) I use a hatchet too, but mine is just bigger than yours. I just keep hitting the template until it gives up and does what I want. If that doesn't work, Notorious takes out his AK and empties the clip. When I take away his microphone, he just shoots anything that moves.
Like this?
Welcome to LyricWiki, Kiefer/Archive 2008!

LyricWiki is an editable lyrics database that has over 2,760,919 pages of lyrics. Included in LyricWiki's database are songs from many different countries, in many different languages and from many different genres, so whatever you are into musically, there is likely something here for you. And if not, please add whatever you can!

If you need help getting started, check out our FAQ and Help pages, particularly the Formatting Artists, Formatting Albums and Formatting Songs sections. Another way to familiarise yourself with the way we do things is to look at some of the Artist, Album and Song pages with a Gold star StarIconGold in the top right corner.

If you need any assistance, just post your message on my talk page, or leave a note on the LyricWiki Help Desk. The Help Desk is on the watchlists of the site administrators, which means you are likely to get an answer fairly quickly if I'm not around. If you wish to make comments or suggestions about the site, or if you have any site-related questions, the best place to post these is on the Community Portal. (The Community Portal is where most of the discussions about the site and planning goes on.)

Whatever, if you need help getting started, please don't hesitate to ask! We don't often bite!

Important: LyricWiki breaks some of the usual capitalization rules for artists, albums, and song titles. Since this applies to all languages using the Latin alphabet, please be sure to familiarise yourself with these by reading LyricWiki:Page Names.

Happy editing!

 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words, on behalf of The LyricWiki team. 01:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Re the odd Image parameter team a, I copied the code from Kiefer when I was his student I still am. Goodness knows what he put it there for but I expect he had his reasons.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
P.S. You can delete my lovely and far superior Welcome from your page if you want Kiefer. I won't be offended. I'll leave it to you to release the general Welcome templates into the wild.

Maybe both of you (and maybe me) should have your templates link to the official one, if you just use the same text. Then, you'd benefit from any changes made to it, such as that comma typo, etc. You can still customize yours as much as you want, just tell me which parts you want customizable and I'll add the possibility to {{Welcome}}. I can already see that you changed the color, so I'll add that. By having your templates call the main template, I can keep it so you still won't have to enter your signatures. team atalkctrb 02:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'm restarting over here.

The image bit was from the old template that I copied from. I changed color and text, essentially, and didn't touch what I didn't understand or have a problem with.

I'd actually prefer to just keep my Welcome template separate from the main one, so I can see who I have personally Welcomed. If you compare it to the main Welcome template, you'll notice that it has a little more of my personality in it and is less generic. Generic is okay, but as LW:PN is my pet peeve, I have it in red, and the bit about the various languages is given tongue-in-cheek, etc.

Team a, thanks for the help with the time stamp. It always bugged me that I didn't know when the template was placed on the user's page. Now the hard part will be training myself to add the "|~~~~~" part!

Redxx, if you are learning how to create a template from me, you have an awful, terrible teacher. That's why we love our 2 new admins, eh? They help fill out a much-needed niche.

P.S. I love leaving for a few hours and come back and I have a half-dozen edits to my talk page. It's always a bit exciting. A bit scary...but exciting!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I understand what you mean about keeping your personal message unique - see User:Team a/Template/Welcome. As for templates, if you ever want to learn anything or have questions about one, or need someone to design one, post on my talk page and I would be happy to help or teach you. team atalkctrb 08:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Instrumental templateEdit

Since it's now required that {{Instrumental}} is placed inside lyric tags, it could be simplified by doing away with the banner template and just keeping <center>''This song is an instrumental.''</center>, right? Because the display is sometimes buggy (at least on IE6), with the paler yellow of {{Banner}} showing through in places. Also, since all Instrumentals are now required to be added to Category:Language/Instrumental, is there a practical reason to keep Category:Instrumental? -- 6x9 (Talk) 02:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the banner bit, since team a is making some changes to {{Banner}}, and it seems to slow the site down every time. -- 6x9 (Talk) 03:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by buggy, as I haven't noticed anything. I generally use Firefox. Visually, though, I like the box-within-the-box look that the Instrumental template gives. To me, it reinforces visually that the lyrics aren't just missing, but are truly non-existent and that the song is an instrumental.
As for the two categories, I'm guessing that there isn't as they both should, technically, be identical. I think of Category:Language/Instrumental as a language category, while Category:Instrumental is more of a music division category. (I'm not sure if that is explained very well. One is the language type, the other a type of music.) I guess since we don't have any other music divisions, such as "Duets", that losing that category wouldn't be a horrible thing. There would have to be some comparisons done between the two categories, to determine if all of Category:Instrumental is included in Category:Language/Instrumental, and the former categorization removed if the latter is included, etc., etc., but I'm sure that the change could be done. (Which I imagine you've already thought of how to go about it already, anyhow!) You might want to mention this in the Community Portal just to see if someone thinks of something that I haven't. I'm just thinking off the top of my head here, so....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) I knew I wasn't the only one killing the job queue! {{Banner}} should not be within the instrumental template if it is within lyric tags, so good call. Is {{Instrumental}} itself supposed to be used between lyric tags on a song page, or are the lyric tags just supposed to be inside the template itself? Ideally, the song page should not add the tags, because if the template is just the text, then we'll have to use a bot to add those tags to every old page with {{Instrumental}}. team atalkctrb 03:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC) {{banner}} and I are involved in an epic struggle.
(Edit conflict too) The "box-within-the-box" thing was actually what I meant with buggy... Usually I just saw the normal lyrics box (the way it also displays now), but sometimes, mostly when switching between windows, the "inner" box suddenly became visible. I always thought the latter was due to some bug, or because of yet another IE6-related incompatibility... seems I had it the wrong way around. At least the new version adheres more strictly to Rule #1 ;‑)
It was decided a while ago (can't remember where) that lyric tags should be on all song pages, including instrumentals. A bot (can't remember which) then went through all pages in Category:Instrumental and added the lyric tags. -- 6x9 (Talk) 04:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Instrumental as lyrics is required for instrumentals, a non empty lang param is also required for all songs, hence we have both Categories of Inst and lang Inst, if you are making either category redundant (or ven if you don't!), it is best to provide for a maintenance category for when a song has instrumental as lyrics but has something besides instrumentals entered as language (explains the ~700 discrepency btwn the two cats right now and this will grow larger while SNLI is under operation for the next month or so). There are also instrumental songs that do have spoken words which further confuses the confus-ables; an instrumental with spoken words is/is not an instrumental? or is it multilingual? ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 04:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm officially getting nervous. There appears to be questions asked and actions taken before answers have been given. Breakneck pace can cause problems....
The Instrumental template should be placed between the lyric tags on the page, and not included in the template itself. The auto-template for new song pages automatically adds the tags, programs/sites/scripts/aliens accessing our database could very well use the lyric tags as a point of reference when looking for an extracting lyrics, and if finding the Instrumental template there, will therefore know automatically that the page is lyricless, etc., etc., etc.
And I just got a notice that someone left a new note here, so now I'm going to save and re-apply. Lather, rinse, repeat....  :-] Great googaly-moogaly, EchoSierra just added something. Ahhhhhahahahhhhhhhh! (Man, my talk page is just too popular tonight!)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
If it helps any we can have all language /Instrumental discussions to my talk page ;) Hilarious Kiefer, I'm just sittin here having a hoot! going for a fresh rinse.... ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 04:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Echo, can you have S2E2 go through Category:Instrumental and make sure that all of them have the lyric or lyrics tags before and after the template itself? I'll remove the lyrics tags from inside the template in a few minutes. At this point, the template will just be centered text, and inclusion in that category. team atalkctrb 04:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Don't remove them – they are in the noinclude section and necessary for the example to work. Never mind, I just saw that you moved it to /doc. (Should have done that myself...) -- 6x9 (Talk) 04:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I'd <blink><underline><strong><big>really</big></strong></underline></blink> prefer a total revert. It weren't broke. If you want to consolidate the two categories, I can understand that. The look of the template was fine, however. Thanks.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I can have Instrumental category verified, but I need time (12000/how many hits per second?!) So what will happen to the lang param of Instrumentals? and what should there be when song is instrumental, The look of instrumental was fine as it was I don't care either way, cause I am not using old hardware/OS! ES (Talk) 05:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
(Edit conflict with Echo) @Kiefer: I disagree on both counts, and here's why. Reverting Instrumental so that it contains {{Banner}} will require us to change whether or not we include lyric tags for instrumental pages, which I'm against. I think that all pages should have a similar look. Also, let's be honest, {{Banner}} is ugly as hell. Luckily it's only going to be on a few pages on this site. Merging the two categories is a bad idea in light of Echo's post, because entire artists and their songs are having their language parameter changed, so all the Instrumental songs will have the wrong language, which is a required parameter. Only by fixing the language later, via Category:Instrumental, will they have the proper language again. @Echo: I don't think 6x9 or I are trying to change the look of instrumental pages at all. It seems that most of us don't see {{Banner}} when we look at an Instrumental page, but it still shouldn't have still been in {{Instrumental}}, and neither should extra lyric tags. team atalkctrb 05:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

(OUTDENT) I'm not sure how having Instrumental including {{Banner}} will require the site to remove the lyric tags. We've had it this way for years now, so I must be confused as to your meaning. I don't find Banner to be ugly; to me it's simply a box for emphasis. If you wanted to somehow make the Instrumental notice contained in a more visually appealing box, then I'd be happy to look at a mock-up.

As for the merging of categories: do you mean that having the two categories allows for monitoring and checking that the Language is Instrumental if the Instrumental template has been used? If so, I can understand that keeping the two would be helpful. It's because of that sort of thing that I mentioned that such a merge should be discussed in the Community Portal. As I wrote earlier, I "see" the tiny connotative difference between the two categories, and if others thought that a merge was good, then I didn't have any objection. I understood the motivation, but didn't feel strong enough to say that I supported the merge. But neither do I feel strong enough to oppose such a merge, either.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   05:39, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

@template editors:Lyric Widgets Rely On Lyric Tags To Work. if you remove the lyric tag from instrumentals, then you need to pipe it to the client widgets via the API. until such time, leave the lyric tags in place (If you can mess with the API, there are more important things about the API that needs changing)
@∑ And on another related matter: Can template changes be scheduled & voted on? Can we have a job queue for it so that like once a week changes are made and multiple minor changes can be done in one go (once per week etc.) rather than multiple diff changes everytime someone feels like it? ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 05:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
no offense, but lw has come to a crawl over aesthetics
I've noticed that the site is slow, as well. There was a period earlier today when I couldn't even save my edits...things would time out. (Right now it's taking about 7-10 seconds to preview. Normally it's just a couple of seconds for me.) With the new servers that just shouldn't be happening. Currently the Stats page says that the job queue is "only" 67,694. This is down from the 369,000+ yesterday, but still a bit high. If things time out, users go elsewhere. I'd like to refer all to Kiefer's Rules #1 & #3. (Darn, that thing comes in handy.  :-] )
PS: I'm going to bed. You all don't have to leave, but please don't wake the missus.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   06:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I always thought it was my school's internet connection. I've noticed that the site seems to be grinding to a halt, but I have no idea why it could have occurred. Perhaps someone could ask Sean to run some diagnostics and figure out where the problem is?
@Echo: I haven't removed the tags from the template, because I wanted to see if there were objections. I want to make sure that all the song pages have lyric tags, so I won't be changing the template yet. I'd like to point out, however, that there's a possibility when there are two sets of tags that either one or two tags could be grabbed accidentally. Then, the page is fixed, and then it is "edited" to fix the downloaded version. Also, your idea about templates is a very good one. Hopefully I'll be grabbing all the Album edits for the next month (too optimistic?), but I have noticed this as well. Maybe a project page - LyricWiki:Templates? I do actually have quite a few edits I'll be making to virtually every major template, but I'll be stretching that out over the next month or so, depending on the size of the job queue.
@Kiefer: I mean that we know that the language parameter is being changed deliberately as all of an artist's songs are changed at once. This is fine, and it beats the alternative. We'll just change them back later. Until this is no longer the case, we will continue to need both categories. It's on these technical grounds that I think it shouldn't be put to the community portal (this is the only time I have thought that before). team atalkctrb 06:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Hold on a minute... what are you proposing for bringing the banner back? Do you want a banner inside the lyrics tag? I thought that didn't work anyway, unless you're running IE6. I'm very confused about this proposal. team atalkctrb 17:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC) and yes, I do get confused often, but please humor me


for reverting {{Instrumental}} to previous version (with {{Banner}}) 
Kiefer again, because he feels so strongly about it ;-) (You know I do...I whipped out the <blink> tag on it!)
Redxx (It visually emphasizes the song is an instrumental and it looks more stylish.)
for keeping the current version 
Team a

Testing boxes in my boxEdit

See here. The second one should basically look the same as {{Instrumental}} before I changed it. (Note that on IE6, the display of the box is buggy; I only get to see it in rare cases.) The third one is me trying a different tack: this one displays correctly on IE6. (I still prefer the first one, however. Are you really sure you actually *like* the box-in-the-box, and don't simply prefer it because you're used to it? Sorry, but I had to ask.)
PS. This discussion is getting rather long-ish; maybe we should move it to Template talk:Instrumental? -- 6x9 (Talk) 22:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

By including the banner inside, it's like that peach-colored box has 3 borders, each with its own width and color. team atalkctrb 23:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
The version in your sandbox with the simplified version of Banner is perfectly wonderful. I'm not sure why IE6 would even possibly be buggy with it, though. All standard html, isn't it? (The ANFSCD version gets a bit wacky at extremely narrow widths...not that anyone would really get that narrow, though.)
As for whether or not I am used to it (fair question): Many moons ago when the bison roamed free over the endless plains and the world (LW) was new and still-forming, I came to the site a total newbie to the world of wiki. At that time, most users actually just used the Instrumental template without lyrics tags. I saw a few users that just placed the template inside the tags and was so impressed with the way that it appeared, that I began using the lyrics tags with the template as well. It just appeared more professional, interesting, official, and really brought the eye to the center of the page for the note's text (which is nice, since users likely get used to looking on the left-hand side for the lyrics.) It also boost the height of the section a bit so that the page feels just a few pixels "heavier." So, I was used to it without, but then thought that the additional box was better. Then, of course, came the functional issues that ES brought up earlier. So, that's the story.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Looks like IE6 has a problem with divs inside of divs*; replacing div with a table appears to do the trick. It now displays correctly and consistently (and consistently ugly – SCNR). Unfortunately, the box isn't quite centered vertically... same with the last version. I still like the look of the boxless version better, though.
(*) Funnily enough, someone somewhere used divs inside lyricbox to display lyrics in two columns, and IE6 had no problem with *that*. Maybe it's just when both divs are defining different backgrounds and/or borders? -- 6x9 (Talk) 04:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Why not just use an icon to "display" that a song is instrumental? The template stays where it is within lyrics tags, browser shows the icon, and LW coulda be a lil more international. ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 05:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I could support adding an icon for the international situation, but not the removal of the English text. It does no harm, is useful and understandable for what is likely a large majority of our users, and is placed where users are expecting to see lyrics. Perhaps an music notes icon before and after the English text?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   05:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree that an image would attract the eye's attention. The question, then, is how to communicate "lyriclessness". Someone should ask Aqua. I agree also that the English text shouldn't be removed; to make LW work for different languages, we can just selectively change the message later. It's a simple template, and it's pure text, after all. team atalkctrb 08:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The I can make tables too Poll Edit

Screenshot of 6x9's Instrumental page (Top 6 = how page displays in Firefox. Bottom = how it displays in IE6)
This is NOT part of poll but worth a look.

Instrumental Poll
current templatesame in boldand on Steroids#2 in greywith a simplified version of {{Banner}}same as #5, using table instead of divMonty PythonPsychedelic Rainbow
Team a
Tarquin Fin-tim-lin-bin-whin-bim-lim-bus-stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuitbarrel disqualified because he can't spell FhtagnMick Jagger
Jack Bruce
Richie Blackmore
Kate Bush
Throatwobbler Mangrove

To be honest, I prefer "the simplified version of Banner" (only because the banner is ever so slightly thinner) but since I feel sure that 6x9 would come to agree that the banner version is perfectly wonderful if he was forced given the opportunity to get used to it, I have opted for the banner version that displays correctly in IE6.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe if the inner box was vertically centered, I might eventually stop hating it with a passion and settle for mere dislike... Anyway, I added another option – grey text also signifies that lyrics aren't available (a bit like greyed-out menus in Windows). I could even live with icons left and right of the text. (A simple symbol?) -- 6x9 (Talk) 20:42, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad you put so much time into this, 6x9. I do like the bold (#2) as well as my first choice, #1 (the current version). I am willing to compromise with the banner wavers, and I just realized what (small) part I do like. If the (ugly) borders were removed from the box, and maybe a different background was used instead, I think I would dislike it less. Also, the banner should definitely be built into the instrumental template, so that all pages with instrumental template calls wouldn't be affected whenever banner is updated. First, I'd like to have somebody check what happens when you try to download the lyrics for an instrumental while it has a banner on it. Has anyone done that? team atalkctrb 20:50, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
RFLMAO@the special Babushka version..Yep..that's the one for me, no doubt about it whatsoever! Psychedelic. Weird and wonderful..It's so good that I reckon you should copyright it 6x9...Where do I sign?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Before more people vote on this, might I suggest we first agree on one of the three basic looks: (1) text only; (2) bordered box; (3) box without borders (Team a's idea)? Then we can work out the details (text color, bold or not, box color, border width, image or not...). Also, anyone wanting to try out their own ideas in my sandbox is welcome to do so; that's what a sandbox is for, after all. -- 6x9 (Talk) 19:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

To be honest I think we've probably gone as far as we can go with the poll before the poll. So can I suggest that this discussion now gets moved to the Template talk:Instrumental and a note put on Community Portal/Admin Portal encouraging further views (and thereafter moved to Template talk:Instrumental/Community Portal)?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:28, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
We haven't reached a consensus about this issue, specifically about whether removing the banner was a positive edit. This discussion hasn't continued recently, and there's no discussion in the Community Portal. So, I'm going to revert to the old use of banner. I prefer no {{banner}}, and I like the way this discussion has continued, but we really need consensus. I believe that we'll agree to take banner out, or replace it with a customized version, but until then, it's back to the old template. team atalkctrb 00:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
No, don't! This will only bring the job queue to its knees. It's better to leave it unchanged until consensus is reached than to have to change it AGAIN. -- 6x9 (Talk) 00:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
The problem however is that consensus likely isn't going to be reached. Everyone has their own preference. This is the problem with changes taking place to any site-wide templates without prior discussion. Now the template is in limbo. It hasn't been reverted, hasn't been updated, it
So, let me try this another way. When you visit a site, that site has a certain "look." A color scheme, a few signature icons, a way to format everything (well, in the case of sites that actually try to be uniform), and so on. LyricWiki has a certain "look" as well. Much of that has to do with wikis in general, but some has to do with choices that Sean and others made early on. Go to some of the other well-established wikis, such as Lostpedia or Heroes Wiki, and they're visually not like us. We tend to go with blues and muted oranges for our color scheme. Red we don't use, because it has a visual link to the empty links. Purple now, due to the star rankings is associated with non-English songs. We have our little bubble-headed no-eyed dude for an icon, etc., etc.
Changes to the "look" of the site are taking place, but with the Album template, for example, it's mainly getting an updated look. The problem with changing from the standard too much is that the site identity gets weakened a bit. Pretty soon "home" doesn't feel so much like home anymore. That is how I feel about the instrumental visual. It's not a bad one, so there was no reason to change it. As far as I can tell, it was changed because Banner wasn't liked. Now we have the version using table, which has the same visual, but without the dreaded template. Let's just use it, okay? I'm ready to get this whole thing into my archives!  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:06, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I'm officially peeved. When is a revert not a revert? When it's done at 85%. That wasn't even one of the options. I'm off to work on the Grammy list....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry about that. I wasn't trying to step on any toes or cause any issues, or indeed to contradict my own post. The template has gone though a few revisions, and not just because of the banner issue, but because it's been edited to follow the documentation policy, its categories have been changed or added, and the documentation examples and use have themselves changed, in part to include mention of the lyrics tags, so I did have to add banner back rather than a strict revert. I should have payed more careful attention, because I mixed it up with another template I've been working on, and the Mediawiki banner css classes, which use/used 85% width. As soon as the job queue drops late tonight, I'll submit a revision to put the width back at 100% so we can discuss the Instrumental template as it was visually before any of this happened, as I had intended with the last edit. Once again, sorry for mucking it up. team atalkctrb 23:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Ah, that makes sense. I'm better now and all is forgiven...errors happen. As long as it isn't part of some diabolical scheme to cause me to go completely insane, I'm good. I've got a daughter, so that'll be her job when she's around 14 or 15 or so.  :-] As for the job queue, I have been monitoring it since last night (I was having slow down and site inaccessibility issues again) and it essentially hasn't gone down from around 18,500 since last night, and has been at 18,555 since this afternoon. I e-mailed Sean about it, so we'll see if anything changes. He might actually be sleeping by now, though.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Help:FAQ Edit

Goodness me guys - you have been busy!! Well I'm off to my bed now so I'll read what I've been missing out on tomorrow. (I'm a bit behind on my Watchlist too so apologies).

Anyway Kiefer, please have a read of what I have written on the FAQ page. It was badly in need of updating. Please amend/add, etc. as appropriate. You know how important I think help pages are. If well written they can save us all a lot of unnecessary work. We can also just direct people there, instead of going over the same ground as and when new users join because there isn't a page that quite fits the purpose. Our help pages are excellent, but sometimes people just want to get stuck in and don't want chapter and verse. This is where I see the FAQ page entering the equation. Besides, these would seem to be the most basic questions.

I'm very tired. Nite nite.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

You are amazing. I actually had that page still open in my browser from last night, as I was going to try to update it tonight. You did a bang-up job and made my job MUCH easier. I added/edited here and there, but mostly just little nits were picked. Thanks!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Yeah I know
But one thing I've noticed is that you never change very much of what I do. I'm never too sure if this is because you think it doesn't need it, or because you think I might be offended or upset. But if it is the latter, you really shouldn't be concerned because I'd soon let you know if I disagreed. However I really don't see that as being likely.
Ok, well now you've looked at it I'll move it to the main page, because warts and all I think we both agree that it's an improvement on what's there atm. I don't consider it needs a vote. I'll bring the other admins attention to it so they can add to it and look for flaws I might've missed when compiling it. It also won't affect the job queue. (lol...we gotta curb these young whipper-snappers...).  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 13:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Looks good, Red. Good job - hopefully this will cut down on the new user and Uberbot/Janitor battles. team atalkctrb 18:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC) </job queue kill>
Thanks team a. It was you saying what you did about it being incorporated into the Welcome note that prompted me to do it, so thank you. There are a number of pages that are badly needing updating (rfl@LyricWiki:Announcements, unedited since 2006) but of all of them I felt that this was perhaps one of the most important.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I saw it while revising and rearranging the help contents page (which is really ugly because I'm colorblind when it comes to websites) when I came upon the FAQ. I thought, "there's no way that's our FAQ!" Now I think I can be happy with it. team atalkctrb 22:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey, you ask me to look at something to see what needs to be changed, trust me, I'll change what I think needs to be changed. :-] Now if I had done it all by myself, I probably would have done things differently...added something different or left something out that you added, who knows...? But I don't fear editing anything because it might offend you or upset you. Hey, I've changed stuff before, and you've gone back and done some more editing yourself afterward, and things came out well.
Trust me, if I have problems with a situation, I'll speak out. (Instrumental template, anyone?) I figure by now that you know that I'm easy-going with the stuff that can be flexible and mobile, and only really say that "things need to be this way" and get more serious about things that I've thought about and have a reason for. Maybe I'm just a hard-nose, but I can't think of an instance where I've really stood my ground that I haven't either convinced everybody (or nearly everybody) with the reasons behind my positions or we've all been able to come to a good compromise that satisfies those positions and still is able to include the new ideas, desires, and needs. I don't like to feel that I'm working against anyone, but I won't just go along to get along, either, when I feel that it's necessary to take a position for or against something. (He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named, for example.)
I always go back to the idea that all of us that take the time to talk and discuss things (whether admins or not) are really showing our commitment to the success and improvement of the site. For some, this commitment may be brief and only about a certain item, but it's still something that they feel is important enough to take the time to bring up and discuss. (Even He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named.) Having so many admins makes having a true unanimous consensus difficult at times, but when we all discuss things, we really do come out with a top-notch product, I think. We're just all going to have to be flexible and patient and make sure we all work in a cooperative manner about any site-wide changes, like we have been doing with the Song and Album templates. (The FAQ page, for the reasons that you mentioned, are okay to change without discussion, as long as the info matches what we've got on our various help pages or what has been discussed and decided in the Portals. It's a one-page deal that doesn't make the job queue go all Mr Creosote-like and can easily be changed if anyone needs to without any site-wide consequences.)
Okay, that's enough of that. A 10 dollar reply when a 2 cent answer would have sufficed.  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

He don't like you now ;) Edit eyes hurt...User_talk:  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 18:00, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

My favorite wacky editor. (Although he's been a little less wacky lately, which is why I hadn't already blocked that account.) It appears that he may have a buddy, as that person is coming from the same area. The new person actually "talks" in the summary, though. Weird.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:13, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes I did as you asked from before and so I had a few of those songs including KoRn in my watchlist. I guessed it was the same user. After which I went through all their recent contributions checking carefully. (I added them all to my watchlist too). But can I ask how do you know all those IP addresses are same editor? It's not something I've ever really had need to ask before, but would like to know.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 01:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC) P.S. Hope you are well. I put up my Christmas tree tonight (is why I'm late on).
I'll e-mail you.  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Lol I was thinking that would probably be a good idea ;) Thank you.  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 02:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
On its way.......    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Mmmm... Do you reckon it's your pal?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 05:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

TMBG edits Edit

I usually just fix spelling and grammar issues... I apologize for the edits. --Raygun Shaun 20:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Spelling edits are always appreciated, no doubt about it. (Some spelling is a bit...uh...creative, to say the least.) No huge deal on the reformatting, but it's probably best to leave things how they are line-wise unless you have a reference. Minimal line-ending punctuation is also quite common for song lyrics, so while "normal" writing might use commas and other punctuation at the end, often times they're absent from lyrics, so a cautionary note there. Thank you for responding to my question. I wanted to make sure that another source wasn't giving you different information. That would be fun...deciding which source is more "official." Best wishes, and happy editing.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Page Count Issues Edit

It was mentioned earlier (sorry can't find the ref) that LW uses the <lyric*> tag to count song/content pages. I just added lyrics tags to about 4000 Instrumentals that were missing it... caused no change in content page count. So now I wonder how do we calculate the content page total? and how do we count album and artist pages that goes towards content pages, and are images counted too? TIA, cheers ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 18:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Darn good question. I thought it was on Sean's talk page...looking...looking.... Ah, yes...!User_talk:Sean_Colombo/Archive/2008_December#Pick__a_number... is the archived conversation. I think what you're looking for is: "Fortunately, there is a maintenance script that updates the count all at once and works off of the pagelinks table instead of the actual text of the pages. I've set it up to run at 10pm EST each day now, so our counts will be off by a small margin each day until 10pm." So, tonight it ought to jump a bit.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   18:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response! cheers ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 18:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Well I couldn't forget you now could I? Edit

Happy Christmas Kiefer and all the very best to you and yours in 2009!
love  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 05:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Big News Edit

I maintained so well on the Song Of The Day pages that Redxx presented me the Gold Record award. I'm so thrilled. Merry Christmas & Happy New Year!

-Andrew Horne (talk|contribs) 14:54, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

pages with � in pagename Edit

How do I get rid of pages like this [[Avalanch:El �?ngel Caído]] ? they show up all over the place in every Category like Category:Black Songs Happy NY ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 03:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

That is truly funky. I'm not sure what is going on there. The ones I checked are deleted, so shouldn't show up on that list. One I checked was originally a redirect, so shouldn't have ever been on the Black Songs list in the first place. Um, I'm at a loss to explain the gremlins here.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, yep, same with the ones in Category:Review Me, ok maybe they do belong there, since they sure need a review by The Powers That Be! cheers ∃cho⚡ierr∀ () 04:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I thought these were "the undeletables," they could not be accessed in any way and therefore could not be deleted. I thought they were stuck somewhere deep in the servers' memory banks where they cannot be touched by anyone who wants to. Somehow, when you click on the links they go to the right page or a redirect to the right page, but they actually have the properties of real pages that haven't been touched in ages (such as having a song template, but it cannot be accessed to alter its star color, or the category link Review Me exists on the page, but it can't be deleted). I think you'd have to ask Sean to get the whole technical explanation as to why they cannot be accessed, but I believe that the pages exist but can't be viewed over the internet. --WillMak050389 05:28, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
PS - One more note, because they can't be linked to, (I think) all of them show up in Orphaned pages, there are about 20 or so there. Mainly artist page titles and their "other songs" pages too.

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki