User talk:Kiefer/Archive 2009

From LyricWiki

Contents 1 I did that before it went wild 2 Your sharp looking signature 3 I know this was very late 4 Pink Floyd User Group 5 KoRn 6 Requesting clarification on Page naming rule 7 Please Vote 8 LyricWiki:Song of the Day 9 Groovy little text box thingies 10 Bravo Hits 11 Drawing attention 12 Sen the Man: fLetter = S 13 Proposing a change to {{B-Hits}} 14 Various Artists: Artist's Choice - Rolling Stones, Music That Matters To Them 15 Funky Pages 16 Being Friendly and Bold 17 Please read this talk page 18 Mmmm... 19 a-ha 20 I don't think we should but... 21 Smashing Pumpkins 22 Can you do this please? 23 After The Burial 24 Re: Improved Album Art 25 SOTD..it made sense.. 26 Trusted 27 Community Portal project page 28 Album art 29 John Denver: Lyrics Translation 30 kk lets go , 31 Userbox 32 These are yours I believe... 33 Since notime is too shy to do it... 34 A problem in the Aqua section 35 Some LW:PN issues 36 How do I...? Add a Timestamped Signature in Talk pages 37 Mickey's Bitch 38 Kiefer's Signature 39 End of line punctuation 40 More country-related stuff 41 New Warning 42 Spirit of Community 43 Covers 44 Columns 45 One for your collection 46 The Jeff Healey Band 47 This page... 48 Do you recall? 49 {{caption}} 50 Foundation (band) 51 Songs in multiple languages 52 One last question… 53 in reference to Catman listing 54 one final question about Catman listing 55 Another case of Does This Really Belong Here 56 Multiple versions of the same song 57 Question...

[edit] I did that before it went wild

Besides I've been busy practicing my html/wiki coding skills and ensuring you don't beat me in the "Best and most cluttered User Page" stakes.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 04:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC) P.S. I'm not really a giraffe

Yeah, yeah. Your Queen edit was 9 hours later. Have no fear, you're still technically perfect. You were just giving me a reason to do a little something on one of my Top 10 songs. See, you are always thinking about others!  :-]

Speaking of html/wiki coding...my New Year's resolution is to get that new !@^#$!%! Community Portal page going. I've got to finish the Grammy's List page first, though. What a slow process that is. Cut/Paste, check to see if the album is 2008 or 2007, etc., etc., etc. Plus, a couple of times while I was editing, Firefox crashed on me and I lost all the work I had done. Much cursing and screaming did take place, I assure you. In fact, I'm going there in a bit. After I finish my Watchlist patrols.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Google Chrome FTW! --Mischko (wishing happiness, health and heaps-of-fun for 2009 to all my friends here at LyricWiki!) 09:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Tried it. Didn't work right for me, I think due to my protection scheme. Didn't have the patience to try to figure it out, and didn't like that Chrome lets Google know where you are browsing and that it leaves little goodies on your computer even after you uninstall, so you have to seek them out and blast them the old-fashioned hard way. Of course, maybe these issues have been fixed since day 1, when I tried it. Firefox just gets cranky when it starts eating up too much memory on my computer. Sometimes, I think, there's a flash item on a page that Firefox just keeps chewing on, and suddenly my nice 80-120k Firefox program is taking up 200k+ in memory. Then it says "To heck with this!" and shuts down. I just restart and everything's back up and running better, but my un-saved & un-previewed changes are gone. You like Chrome, though, eh? Maybe I'll try it again sometime.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

As much as I am starting to distrust all things Google, and have been a Firefox fan for many years, I have to put in a good word for GC. Having the tabs at the top is much more intuitive, the new page interface is great, and so is having history or downloads all on their own tab. I started using it when it was Beta, and there were problems like crashing every time I made a bookmark and for other random reasons (as expected) but I've had no problems since installing the final release version. When Firefox releases a new version that has these features, I'll use that instead, but until then, it's just nice to have less interface in your face, if you know what I mean. ♠team a ‹_talk•ctrb› 00:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I read today on the Wikipedia page that you can now turn off the reporting to Google, so that's nice. I'm not sure if the uninstall has been improved. I may try the newest version some time, as I like to have the major browsers for website checks. I just have to figure out how to make it work with my virus protection, I guess.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:16, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your sharp looking signature

Hey Kiefer, Just a quick question: how did you create that sharp looking signature block? I'd like something similar but without the admin part since I R not one ;-) RainbowDragon 19:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

In your preferences, it has a section that says "Signature". (Before the MediaWiki upgrade, it used to say something different, but now it's nice and obvious, thank goodness.) My sig is a bit long, html-wise, so I have {{SUBST:User:Kiefer/Sig}} there. User:Kiefer/Sig has {{User:Kiefer/Signature}} on it, linking to User:Kiefer/Signature, which has the actual encoding. I believe I did it that way so that I didn't have all that code on every page. It's been awhile, though.... As for the encoding, I saw a wiki user from another site whose sig I liked and I adapted it with my own colors, links, etc.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

• sigh* I tried to mimic your coding and my feeble effort turned out like this:

User_Talk:RainbowDragon/Signature I'm not quite sure what I did wrong. I'd appreciate you looking at it when you get time. No hurry. Thanks, RainbowDragon aka Mike

Workin' on it.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, got a few for ya...    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:51, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Holy Cow! You are incredible! I never imagined you'd come up with several choices. So how do I go about implementing a specific one? I think (for now) I'll go for the one with the rainbow colors on the bottom. If I sign a page as {{User:RainbowDragon/Signature}} Won't it want to put them all on the page? -- RainbowDragon

Yeah, right now all will show up. Just delete the others. You can always look at the history to see what you've deleted later, in case you decide to change things again.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   22:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, sir! *huge grin*    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs  

Wow... I've been typing in my signature template for months because I know you can't put templates in your preferences... I had no idea that substitutions worked! I owe you one. ♠team a ‹_talk•ctrb› 00:36, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Groovy cool! I also protected your signatures so that only someone at your particular level can edit it. Peace!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:16, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] I know this was very late

I know this was very late, but thanks for the welcome you gave me last summer. I had forgotten my password, so I had to create a new account of Brambletalon, but now I managed to sign back in as Firestream. The reason I waited to thank you for my welcome was that I might have confused you. Now you might find either of my two usernames, so if you're going to leave me a message, leave it on both of my talk pages. Firestream 23:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Pink Floyd User Group

Hey, I've noticed you have an interest in Pink Floyd, and seeing the amount of users that like them plus the fact that I'm a fanatic, I've created a LW user group for them at LyricWiki:Pink Floyd. I think we could have a really active group there and I'm formally inviting you because of your edits in their direction. Feel free to recruit others also! Thanks for considering it and hope to see you on the dark side (of the moon that is). --WillMak050389 22:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] KoRn

KoRn:Faget Your friend seems to have taken up residence. I've had him once or twice this week myself. Could you protect those pages for a while until he gets frustrated and finds somewhere else to play?  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 04:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I thought you might find this link useful KoRn lyrics  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 05:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Requesting clarification on Page naming rule

I noticed a user this afternoon redirecting pages from Ian Dury And The Blockheads to Ian Dury & The Blockheads. On the page regarding page naming rules and punctuation it says, "Words should not be substituted with their equivalent symbols (& for And, @ for At, # for Number, etc.)" It gives Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers as the correct way to go over Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers. My question is has this rule been scrapped? If not, somebody will need to do some mass reverting and let him/her know what is what. If that rule no longer applies then I will hush and just go about my business. Thanks,    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   19:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, that would have been me. I was under the impression that artists go under whatever their "official" name is, which I assumed was "Ian Dury & The Blockheads" as per Wikipedia (eg. [1]), whereas Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers is under "Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers" ([2]).

Checking the help page again, I'm not sure if the "Tom Petty rule" only applies to artists and the "Jack & Diane rule" only applies to songs, or if both apply to both. Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young has been around for awhile without comment, so I thought using & in artist names was alright.

If we want the Ian Dury songs back to the "And" page, I'll gladly clean it up.

twomeanings 20:14, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

If the "&" is officially part of a name, whether it is an Artist, Album, or Song, then it should be kept (as with Jack & Diane and Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young), but if it isn't part of the official name, as with Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers, then it shouldn't be substituted for the word "And". (So no Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers.) If an artist uses both interchangeably (as was recently revisited with Simon And Garfunkel, then the "&" version shouldn't be used, and the "And" version used, due to the ampersand sometimes playing havoc with MediaWiki. (Although I think the latest version doesn't have the same problems that it used to. Still, no need for a coin toss, use the full word.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please Vote

Could I solicit you opinion on this? --Åqüã†ìкí ƒ_Δ^Σ ¶ 00:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] LyricWiki:Song of the Day

Kiefer can you please tell me why the text is all italisced on the aforementioned page because it seems a bit back to fromnt to me, i.e. album names (always italisced) are normal text and normal text is italisced. It's the same with AOTW, but I know that page was simply copied over from SOTD. I've looked back and it does seem to have been that way for yonks, but like I say it seems like a mistake to me. Many thanks!

Oh and I don't know if you've seen it yet but there is a post in A.P. that needs your attention. It's a problem of a nice kind which I think you'll have a bit of fun dealing with (hee hee).  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 02:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Hrm. SOTD has the header normal and the nomination quotation in italics. Doesn't bother me.  :-] As for Sen the Man, he said that when he was ready/comfortable in being admin he would tell me. I'm taking him at his word. Peace!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   05:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok oh voice of reason. As you could tell from the post, it all stemmed from patrolling his prolific and admin worthy edits. (Rfl).

Btw I've unitalicized the SOTD page, but it's weird because nominations only get italicised after they have been SOTD, so I'm thinking it must be built in somewhere, like something to do with Uberbot. Shall I ask Sean?  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 13:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd like you to also check out the very top SOTD entry waiting to be added to the queue. The title is all mangled up and the reason has a couple of misspellings.

"Pulse of the Maggots:(http://lyricwiki.org/Slipknot:Pulse_Of_The_Maggots)
Nominated By: 208.66.242.194
Reason: (it shows off every single member of he bands ability will still making an amazing song"

I thought about editing it myself but refrained because I thought it might be considered rude. --   RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   23:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that was a bit different. Fixed it. If you see a nom that has that many errors, go ahead and correct it.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   05:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Wiki rule No.1.756: Be bold!  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 11:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I added your rule to my own copy of Kiefer's Rules. (hee hee hee!) --   RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   19:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Groovy little text box thingies

Hey Kief! When are you going to experiment with your boxes on the Community Portal? (RainbowDragon runs and hides in case Mr. Kiefer didn't appreciate the familiarity of "Kief") http://www.xs4all.nl/~ernstmul/images/msn60/smile024.gif --   RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   20:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

P.S. - The bit about me running and hiding is a joke :-D Why? "Cuz I ain't 'fraid of no ghosts!" (Ghostbusters)

It'll happen. Been a bit, uh, distracted with things in the real world. (Always, but a bit more so lately.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Here's a little something to ease your stress a bit and make you smile: Gimme Dat Ding! [3]    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   18:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bravo Hits

You made an artist page for this series >> Super Hits Of The '70s.., so should Bravo Hits not have an artist page too? (There is quiet a few albums but not linked to any artist page at present, they are only linked to each other by way of the template.) I changed Bravo Hits to link to Category:Compilation Series too btw.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 00:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

My guess is that his answer will be "yes". Whomever does it will have to make it a split catalog page because there are 64 albums in that series! Perhaps Bravo Hits' artist page could consist of just album links with no track listing or album art on it if no one wanted to make a split catalog listing of all the albums on it. --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   00:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

At least Superhits is made easier in so far as it's split into 3: Have a Nice Day (VA compilation series).  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 00:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Superhits probably won't even have to be split: with the first five volumes it's about 6kb, and they all have 12 tracks, so it shouldn't exceed 30kb by much. — 6x9 (Talk) 01:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Whoever did the Bravo Hits series did a nice thing by having them all link together with the template, and I think that any compilation series such as this should likely have such a template for each included album, since the albums don't link back to the "Home" page. (Although it would be nice if the template had a link to the "Home" page.)

As for the "Home" page (remarkably similar to an Artist page :-]), I would, indeed, have one for the Bravo Hits series. If the series is too utterly massive, then listing by volume only, without the track listings, would be good. "Super Hits of the '70s" could also be done this way, but it's just more visually interesting with the album art included. Since, as 6x9 mentioned, it probably won't turn out to be a horribly massive page, the full listings should be acceptable.

I was, however, thinking that the Category:Compilation Series should be applied to the "Home" page, as opposed to individual albums. You've been working a great deal with the various Categories, however, and will honor your experience in the matter.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the reply Kiefer. I think we got that so between us it will all be sorted and recategorised with only home page being the series and album pages being as they were Category:Compilation. That was my fault entirely. I misunderstood the new category you created.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 03:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Drawing attention

Could you have a look at this? Thanks! — 6x9 (Talk) 14:22, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sen the Man: fLetter = S

I was chatting on the LW IRC channel earlier today with DarthNemesis and also with tek (who announced that he has recently got married) and two subjects came up:

1. fLetter. Basically Darth wanted to know what is the ruling now for fLetter? Is it the same as it always was (i.e. as per the help pages)?
2. The other thing was after tek read the "Sen the man" post on AP. It may be helpful for you to see what Senv wrote after he read it: * note that Senv has tentatively suggested that maybe his response could be posted in AP... Here's what 6x9 and I wrote in response.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 02:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
   P.S. I have been working all day on changing red links to blue on Grammy page. Yes I know it's today, but I figured better late than never. I intend to continue for a bit too.

[edit] Proposing a change to {{B-Hits}}

I wanted to find out what you thought of this idea. I think it would be more grammatically correct for the template to say songname was a Billboard Hit rather than is. Also, could we incorporate a date parameter on it like the SOTD badge has? It would turn out looking like this, "Brandy (You're A Fine Girl) was a Billboard Hit on Aug. 26, 1972" As a side note, this song actually was a Billboard number one hit for a week. Brandy (You're a Fine Girl)/Looking Glass:Brandy (You're A Fine Girl) What do you think? --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   19:16, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good to me with the grammar. As for the second point, the Billboard Hit badge is for any song that made it into the Top 20. Having a specific date (or even a date range) might be a bit tough. (Although some clarity as to what the template is for in the template might be nice.) The date change might be better for {{No.1}}. I'd put the idea up in the Community Portal. I don't forsee any problems, but you might get additional suggestions for changes so that everything can be done at one time.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Naw, never mind Kief. The only ones who seem to post to the CP are the admins, Notime2cry, Humbug and myself. You'd think with a community of 37,000 editors that we'd have a lot more interaction with everyone. I find the general apathy disturbing because I think everyone should be as involved and interested in this place as I am. Of course, I tend to live on this wiki so I shouldn't expect others to be as gung ho as I can be Thanks for hearing me out though.

--    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   19:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, anything like this that is a site-wide change (even if relatively minor) should be placed in the Community Portal so that anyone who wishes can comment. 99% of users are probably "here today, gone tomorrow" users, so the fact that there isn't more discussion shouldn't really be a shocker. :-] Like I said, I don't think anybody's going to have any problem with the changes, but they might have some additional ideas for changes. It's just a step in the process. Don't be discouraged! If nobody replies, then be bold and make the changes!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay, the topic has been posted. We'll see how the response is. LOL @ "be bold" - Redxx said the very same thing in another topic on your talk page. I even added her "rule" to my copy of "Kiefer's Rules" because I liked it.    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   20:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

It's the wiki way ;)  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 04:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Various Artists: Artist's Choice - Rolling Stones, Music That Matters To Them

Hi, Kiefer. As I know, you are maintaining and patronizing The Rolling Stones page(s), so hope you've noticed I was working on RS songs today and was near to finish of adding all missing metadata my lwt was able to find. But one album stopped me. That's The Rolling Stones:Artist Choice: Rolling Stones (2003). Page was created by you. But imo it should be moved to Artist's Choice - Rolling Stones (2003), 'cause that's not an RS album, but rather a compilation of RS songs, performed by various artists (see amz, amg, discogs). Unfortunatelly, my lwt autowikyfier is based only on info from MB or amz; but MB doesn't contain info about this compilation; amz contains some info, but without performers. And I'm too lazy (and too tired too) to make all required editing manually, finally it's your territory & property :) cheers, --Senvaikis ^(talk) 23:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I added artist info to the album page. Feel free to change the formatting. --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   01:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

That is truly weird. I did add that album to the list, but I'm not sure where I got that info from. It shouldn't even be on the page, as it isn't technically a RS album. Hrm...here I go a-editing!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

The tracks are actually performed by artists that are enetered as feat. artists. hth ∃cho⚡ierr∀ (☏) 02:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Yup. Got it. All is "groovy" now! Except now the Artist's Choice compilation home page needs to be created to match the Super Hits Of The '70s page. Discogs lists a bunch, Amazon has a bunch, too. Don't have time now, though!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

One more note, this time about debuting RS album. Strictly speaking, it should be The Rolling Stones (1964) (I've made an anticipatory page for it). That was LP, released in UK; US version England's Newest Hit Makers (1964) (with slightly changed tracking) was released six weeks later. I'm not sure if this info is significant enough to make according changes in RS page - I'm leaving a decision to you again :). Otherwise feel free to delete mentioned album page.--Senvaikis ^(talk) 09:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you are totally correct. If you see something that is incomplete or wrong, go ahead and fix it. Not a problem at all. It's a wiki. If I (or somebody else) disagrees, there can always be discussion. For instance, as the two have different titles and slightly different covers, I just kept them as two different album pages. It certainly could have been done the way that you did it, but I figured the 2 versions are important enough to deserve their own page.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Funky Pages

Yes it's happening all over so can't be html on the page. I was going to mention it to Sean.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 21:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Where else are you seeing it? I've only seen it on that page. Perhaps knowing where it is happening can help determine the cause.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Indeed I was just thinking the same..Not Mainspace, or Template (Mainspace?? - rfl) but Help pages and LyricWiki_talk:Bot_Portal Click on history tab and do a compare.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 21:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Sean just e-mailed me (I e-mailed him because pages were timing out for me) and he said that he started re-caching things a few minutes ago. The Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs for me is back to normal, although the Bot Portal (which I haven't opened in a while and therefore I don't have cached on my computer) is still funky. Let's see if it clears up in a bit.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

PS: About the changes I did on Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs, I removed the section referring to the "Old" formatting, as it's been years now since the change and I haven't seen such a page in ages.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes timeouts for me too for past 45 minutes BotPortal a few seconds ago. I occasionally come across old formatting but they are rare. I think with all the bot activity we've probably uncovered most of them now anyway. Talking of help pages, I removed instructions about Parental Advisory today too after someone queried this on my talk page.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 21:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Being Friendly and Bold

Kiefer, I noticed a user who had never gotten a welcome on their talk page so I added the template. I hope I didn't overstep my bounds by doing so, but I remember how good it felt when you added your welcome to my talk page. Somebody acknowledged my presence and offered assistance. I chose to do the same.

I used {{Welcome}} and I noticed that it still references the helpme template. I think that needs updating. I put a note on Template talk:Welcome but I wasn't sure if anyone would notice my post (except Redxx, she sees everything!) Oh, and I tried the optional color parameter in the template and it doesn't work, at least for me. --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   23:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

(update) Could the old welcome template be replaced by what is here? Welcome Sandbox --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   03:52, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

It's supposed to be replaced sometime soon. I'm actually surprised that it hasn't been. I thought it had. Hrm. I forget where the discussion was. The Community Portal, I'd imagine.

As for Welcoming new users, feel free to do so. It isn't meant to be an admin-only thing. I try to always Welcome any registered users whose edits show up on my Watchlist, and on those occasions that I patrol the Recent Changes page, I Welcome reg'd users there as well. But you can certainly welcome those that you see. It is really good to do that with users who are editing pages that you have interest in. That way you have "common ground" in that you like the same Artist/Album/Song.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   05:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

OMG, Redxx is not a guy? (faints)

--Paranoia is but a higher state of lucidity 00:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Haa haa no, I'm afraid not but I do a very good impression ;)  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 00:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please read this talk page

Kiefer, please see the discussion at Template_talk:BlockUser --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   23:20, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mmmm...

Can I have your expert opinion on this please? Mickey's Bitch

Wikipedia article was deleted. Seems from what they said at the time that the band were just looking to self promote and have them host. I think same applies here. The band certainly set page up as there is too much detail about who, when and where on the page. As wikipdia says, there is no trace of them, not on musicbrainz, etc. Their "official site"..is extremely amateurish. It is just one page of out of focus pictures. I could have done a far better job of making a website (and indeed have in my time). Most of the songs are (not surprisingly) "instrumentals" or just rubbish words, or covers. The "album" artwork doesn't exactly look very real, etc.

Keep or delete? Or leave a note on talk page of editor asking them to provide what? Album covers ?? I recall coming across this once before but it was so long ago that I can't remember how it was resolved. On that occasion the "album cover" was simply a photo of a London signpost. ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 10:20, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

If you think that is amateurish, take a look at this. Yesterday I blocked the user temporarily because he filled out the red links… with pages containing nothing but "non-existent". Sad thing is, he even got SOTD at least once… — 6x9 (Talk) 14:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hrm. It seems to me that I've seen the Mickey's Bitch page before. I was a bit perplexed, I remember. We don't really worry about notability like Wikipedia does, but if the band hasn't actually had an album released (even self-published), then the page is just a collection of songs that the band created and possibly performed. Are the songs available anywhere or have they been available in the past? If not...delete. I certainly draw the line at vanity pages.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:14, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

We've also got to bear in mind that so far as Sean is concerned "published" includes only on YouTube.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 07:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC) P.S. Message I left for creator of page.

[edit] a-ha

Just wondering why you reverted the recent {{move}} tag from their page. It seems to be a legitimate concern, see Wikipedia. --WillMak050389 02:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Cause I moved it. :-] Currently cleaning things up.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, cool. Sorry for jumping the gun. I don't want to say it out loud, but I was thinking it was a revert for revert's sake and no reason to it. And since I brought that up, I wanted to thank you for confronting him/her about it. --WillMak050389 02:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I totally understand.  ;-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] I don't think we should but...

what do you think... ? User_talk:Stormwatch#The_Jackson_5. Strangely enough I had a problem with an edit I made to album title on wikipedia this week too. Seems they don't take the title of the album as it appears on the cover to be definitive.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 06:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Grrr...I have had similar problems with every request for move I have looked at since. By which I mean releases under both names and variations in artist name between Discogs, MusicBrainz, Wikipedia, artist's official site, etc. (See Category:Requests For Moves).

Surely there has got to be a single defining factor? Pity we can't access the 'Official Register of Artists' (lol). That'd sort it. Personally, I still consider the album cover to be the defining factor when it comes to names. And with specific regards to the artist's name, whatever name appears the most on covers of studio releases.

Because asides from the fact that non-music professionals edit most of the music databases we might look to help us decide upon these ambiguities, and for this reason these sites cannot be deemed to be 100% reliable (as we know only too well - lol), it seems to me that upon encountering this problem, one site simply decides for themselves what the name should be and then the others just follow suit. Probably for want of a better way to decide this. This would certainly seem to be proved by what I was told by Wikipedia this week, in so far as to justify wanting to revert an edit i had made to correct an album name, the only thing they could come out with was to refer me to 'what the album was listed as on other sites'. One site they referred me to being MusicBrainz. However, from what I've seen today, taking their lead from MusicBrainz only applies when it suits them. Me, well I would rather not perpetuate errors others have made, even if that does mean I stand alone!

Deep breath...count to ten..Sorry for ranting on your talk page. I always get like this when I'm frustrated. I feel better now. Thanks :-) Would still be glad for your thoughts though.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 09:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Be calm, oh frustrated one. The album is the primary source for "official-ness". (Cover or printed on CD/LP) The link that Stormwatch links to uses "Jackson 5." The album covers use "Jackson 5" (or "Jackson 5ive"). They're like the Eagles, where the "The" is often added, but it shouldn't be. So, it should be "...in concert with the Jackson 5" not "...in concert with The Jackson 5", but that line is often blurred. What is causing you to think that it's "The Jackson 5"? And yeah, Wikipedia flip-flops considerably on the name.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

What? You want an Anniversary response? OK, here goes:

1. It's how they they began life... .
2. It's also how they have always been introduced. Think about it...when have you ever heard a presenter say "Here are Jackson 5"? Never. They always say "Here are THE Jackson 5". Give up yet? ;)
3. Plus, as you can see from the following links, all their singles from their introduction to the world by Diana Ross in 1968 right through to 1971: "I Want You Back" "ABC" "The_Love_You_Save" "I'll Be There were all released under The Jackson..Five/5/5ive.

I ask you, would a record company have repeatedly kept making the same mistake upon introducing a new artist to their fans? And more to the point, would any artist worth their salt continue allowing that level of incompetence? Bearing in mind that singles were far more important in those days (certainly for pop artists) than albums?

I rest my case ;)

 ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 10:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

"I ask you, would a record company have repeatedly kept making the same mistake upon introducing a new artist to their fans?".....of course this also works in reverse..mmmm...I'm uploading album covers atm.

[edit] Smashing Pumpkins

Hi Kiefer, I saw you reverted Jarlac's legitimate edit on Smashing Pumpkins. See, the lyrics are different on Saturnine and Satur9. There are also other songs on MachinaII that have alternate lyrics (i.e. "If there is a god (full band)", "If there is a god (piano/vox)", "Glass' theme (spacey version)" etc). Those were on LyricWiki before, but someone changed them to redirects I think. Also, the Smashing Pumpkins page looks really messy. Maybe you are the right person to tell us mere mortals what should be done with all those compilations, b-sides and what not. (Although I'm sure whatever changes are made, some wiseass will come along and change that to whatever he/she prefers...) Cheers, --DägäDägä 08:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, different lyrics. I can handle that. When is each version used? From what I could tell from my research, using the links at the bottom of the SP page primarily, but also on a SP fan site, the title for that album is "Saturnine", not "Satur9." If that version is different, then linking to "Satur9" as a way to separate the two is a good thing (I got into researching the song because the editor before me switched titles from Saturnine to Satur9 to Satur99, and then changed the Artist to merely "Smashing Pumpkins", which, yeah...I've researched that bit before, too, what a mess on the page with that, which is why it should have been just SP, I guess, but it was surrounded by "TSP", and so I forgot the final case on that. My error there, no doubt. All those conflicting edits by the same editor put up a red flag to do a little fact-checking.) I'm glad to let someone who is a SP fan clear this situation up. Some sort of notation needs to be made on those two pages to show that they are distinct versions of the same essential song, so that neither version gets redirected to the other. If you let me know what the history/origin/purpose/whatever of those two versions are, I'll try to figure out an appropriate way to differentiate/note things. As for the SP page itself, I didn't really look too closely at how it was formatted. If you want to attempt a reorganization of the page (all those "The Smashing Pumpkins" links need to be changed and the pages moved if they haven't already been, for example), I will be happy to lend a hand, an eye, or an edit. Whatever you wish.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Can you do this please?

LyricWiki_talk:Page_Names#ALL_CAPS_Song_Example  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 11:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I gave it a shot, although I try to avoid this situation. I used to let teknomunk worry about the Japanese stuff, but since he's around so infrequently....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks but I was surprised that these songs should often be uncapitalised. I wasn't expecting thar. I thought that they should stick as close to the official title as possible? Like with all other titles? So why? (If I don't ask someone else will). And what do you mean by "often" ?  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 20:54, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

How do we decide when an all-caps title is supposed to be spelled that way, and when it's just a formatting thing (like bold or italic)? There must be lots of albums (this one, for example) where song titles are consistently in all-caps on the tray card, in the booklet and on the CD, but no-one would think that the correct title is "SISTER MOONSHINE" rather than "Sister Moonshine", would they? — 6x9 (Talk) 21:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

When they are mixed on Japanese albums.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 22:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

It wouldn't be unthinkable that a band would issue a Japanese release with everything in all caps just to boost their sale, would it? MADE IN JAPAN ∃cho⚡ierr∀ ( ☏ • ⎋ • ⌫) 22:03, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but with Japanese artists/titles, caps is relevant..  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 22:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I wish teknomunk was around more. I took 2 years of Japanese in high school, and have a glancing knowledge of some aspects of the Japanese culture. In Japan, the type of character is important. Hiragana, katakana, and kanji are all used in special ways. Hiragana is the "basic" character set. When a kanji (Chinese-styled one-character equals a concept) character is written in a children's book, for instance, tiny hiragana characters are placed above it so that its meaning is understandable even if the reader hasn't learned that kanji character. Katakana is primarily used for words appropriated from other languages (such as English) or for special emphasis. When it comes to English characters, they usually use the capitalized form. I believe because that's the form that more people are likely to recognize and know. So, even though they use "STRENGTH.", it would normally be written uncapitalized as "Strength."

I put the exception in there, because I have seen artists (non-Japanese, English-speaking types) who have a title on an album that is in ALL CAPS!!!!! as if they are shouting. By our standards, those titles should be kept all-caps. Hence "often." As I said, I've tried to avoid this situation in the past. It gets...complicated.  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok thank you. So even though they put caps for English songs they really mean it to be lower case? lol yes confusing. Ok well what about Japanese artist names then? Only coincidentally, a user asked about a Japanese artist with all caps today...  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 04:14, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] After The Burial

Hey Kief,
I'd like to know your thoughts on this. I've been adding hometown/country info lately and I came across a situation that stumped me. The group, After The Burial, are from the Minneapolis-St. Paul (Minnesota) area. Their myspace page lists their location as the twin cities. In the home town categories there are entries for both Minneapolis and St. Paul but what if the artist uses the popular term "twin cities" as their location? I've left the city section blank for now but was curious what you thought.

On a related note, what about cities that cross state lines such as Kansas City? Officially there is a border somewhere in the city but most people around here usually just say, "I'm from K.C." or Kansas City and don't normally specify KS or MO. --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   18:23, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Always a stumper here and there, eh? If they state that they are from the "Twin Cities", then feel free to use Minneapolis-St. Paul. I'd make an "editor's note" (using <!-- The Note Goes Here -->) next to the city as an explanation why it isn't just Minneapolis, though.

As for the second situation, I'd use whatever state the majority of the city is in. In this case, I think (without Wiki-ing) that the majority of the city is in Missouri, yes?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:17, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Improved Album Art

Hey, thanks for the note. I attempted to do the "Upload a new version of this file" route a couple times, but for some reason, it didn't work (perhaps because the file was outside the correct size range?), so I went the "New upload" route instead. Thanks for the info on the file size limits. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scottique (talk • contribs).

Please sign your messages by adding ~~~~. Thanks! You're not the first user to try uploading a new version several times :-) If the page still displays the old image, it's usually because of your browser's cache, so if refreshing the page doesn't work, try emptying the cache first. — 6x9 (Talk) 20:32, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] SOTD..it made sense..

It wasn't intentional, but I seem to be becoming more and more involved in this. Anyway, I have added a new sub section to the nominations list as it was getting difficult to manage (see here).

When you got a minute could you look at the current list of nominations and move any to pending that you feel should go there.

There is also a couple of political type nominations too and since politics is not my strong point, I'd be grateful if you would check these to ensure the content isn't likely to cause any offence.

Question: Is there a maximum number of nominations that can be held at any one time in the queue? Only I find myself checking the same ones as I have already done (added links to, etc.), plus the list is also getting kinda long.

Thank you!  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 12:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to take a good look at things tomorrow. Limited time today, unfortunately. :-[    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I did a little bit tonight - removed noms that were already SOTD. I got sidetracked a bit with the UFO page that originally didn't have any albums listed before 1992. The lyrics are a mess, as well, with weird notations for repeating choruses, etc. I was going a bit nuts trying to fix those, and just had to give up.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I saw thank you. I'll visit song pages in future to see if it's got a badge on it and check links to make sure they aren't simply pointing to redirects too. Like I say, I didn't set out to interfere ;) (which is why I haven't been checking/correcting everything on the page), I have just become more and more involved in this. That last nomination was a bit well...controversial wasn't it (lol) No maximium for the Q then? Sidetracked you say? Why do you think I never get to the end of my watchlist?  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 05:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Aww...Seems like the new "Preferred date" parameter is a success.

Watch out, he/she'll probably start ranting about freedom of speech and censorship next (and maybe throw in another Hitler or two). Too bad they never heard of Godwin's law. — 6x9 (Talk) 12:39, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Trusted

For your consideration: What about Notime2cry? --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   18:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC) Ne, RainbowDragon, what is trusted? (not trying to get anything just curious), I don't think I've seen that before (you can answer on my talk page) :P

-- --  Sscout    talk    contribs    ♫   19:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

For administrators, the Recent Changes have a mark that signifies that the page hasn't yet been patrolled (checked as not vandalism or a destructive edit or checked that it perhaps was a damaging edit and fixed) by an administrator. "Trusted" is a user category that I can assign that causes the user's edits to automatically not have that mark. It's used for editors that make a fairly large number of edits and who have been around long enough to be trusted to follow the guidelines and rules of the site. (Doesn't mean that they won't have their edits patrolled, though!  :-] ) It doesn't do much for the editor, but helps us administrators to cut down on the number of pages that we have to patrol. Which leaves us a little more time to do other things. And as for Notime2cry...Check.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Kiefer still checks all my edits. Well he knows he has to, not just cos I often fall asleep at the keyboard (FAAK) but in case one of my three babies (cats) decides to improve their typing skills whilst I am. That actually did happen once..Come to think of it maybe I could blame...mmmm... ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 03:56, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Community Portal project page

Hi Kiefer, in the spirit of "being bold" I've been experimenting on the page with your text boxes. Look at the bottom portion of said page and tell me what you think. I know work has been terribly busy for you lately and I was itching to play around with them a bit. Tell me what you think. --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   17:11, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks good. I started at one point trying to get things to work, but my HTML skills have gone downhill with disuse. Some day I may get around to sketching things out and then begging for help. It's been a project in the back of my mind for about 6 months now, I think. Perhaps I'll ponder things further tonight, now that you've inspired me with your tinkering.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Interesting design. Did you try to go for a Mondriaan look? — 6x9 (Talk) 03:52, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Hrm. Doesn't work correctly in your browser, eh? Feel free to tinker with it. It looks snazzy in Firefox!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

IE7 gives the same avant-gard cubistic view as 6's ie6. Chrome looks slightly better than ie, but not so "groovy" as Kiefer'd like :)--Senvaikis ^(talk) 11:32, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. See Frontway experiments, more friendly to IE & Chrome--Senvaikis ^(talk) 11:58, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yep, those look OK on IE6. Not the nice rounded corners as in the screenshot, but not disjointed either. — 6x9 (Talk) 12:26, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Album art

I didn't know that! Im new here so I don't know much. Thanks for the explanation. Cako 02:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] John Denver: Lyrics Translation

Sorry, I won't delete the {{Additional Albums}} template as I did on John Denver:Shanghai Breezes again - maybe it's because of my carelessness.

PS: I don't know how to talk with others on LyricWiki. Did I do right?

(Talk)

All except for using ~~~~ to sign your comment. Those four tildes will magically turn into your signature, complete with a link to your User page (User:Ddpro-alcb) and stamp the comment with the correct date and time. I've set mine to be a little more fancy:    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Is this right? Ddpro-alcb 14:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it worked!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] kk lets go ,

im Back and i try this program. and what is |asin ? and what should i do , when there is e.g: no video could my page in this case never reach gold rank? greetz (Edited by AtzeX 12:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC))

|asin = is the Amazon Stock Item Number (or some such thing). For instance, Amazon has KT Tunstall's Black Horse And The Cherry Tree with an ASIN of B000T040HK. If you look down the page at the Product Information, you'll see it there below Song Length and Genres.

Also, please use ~~~~ to sign your comments. It automatically creates a link to your User page and a time stamp as well. Thanks!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Userbox

I got there in the end: Template:Userboxes/PartyLW.  Ñô†īṃέ2çяȳ^Talk 23:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Better than I imagined. That picture is great/perfect. Bravo! I'm working on updating my User Page now!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] These are yours I believe...

{{Userboxes/Cert Counter}} & {{Userboxes/Watch Counter}}

 ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 02:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

What, my User Page is the only one that's untouchable?!?  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:47, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Rfl...you almost sound upset! I did consider it (of course), but then I thought you probably wouldn't want to publicize the fact that you only watch 55 pages...when I watch 169. And please don't start on about quality not quantity (hee hee)  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 03:36, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

You and I both know those numbers would be a LOT bigger if we marked as Watched all those pages that we have on our watchlists, though. Plus, I've heard it said that it isn't the size, it's what you do with it that counts. Not sure that's the case here, but.... ;-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hee hee  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 04:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Since notime is too shy to do it...

Hi there. Thanks for uploading the album art for Bryan Adams. Please have a look at this help page regarding uploading album covers. Placing the {{Albumcover}} template in the Summary field ensures that the image is added to Category:Album Covers in addition to providing links to the artist and album. It also attaches a statement to the uploaded file concerning copyright. Thanks. Notime2cry — 6x9 (Talk) 14:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I find this f---ing hilarious (and I'm an Image Nazi too). --WillMak050389 14:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

What? HUH!??!! I mean, I thought...uh...didn't I do that...I mean...I thought that was automatically done for me...uh.... *sigh* I'm a bad, bad man. I will try to do better.

Will "The Image Nazi" Mak, eh? Interesting. Is that like the Soup Nazi from Seinfeld? "NO album art for you!"    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:40, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A problem in the Aqua section

Kiefer, long time, no talk to. I was just looking at the section for Aqua and noticed something ... odd. on the Roses Are Red page, someone has "hosed" the entire page by inserting a massive amount of ASCII code. Unfortunately, it's blocking the edit functions, so there isn't anything I can do - it's up to you or one of the other Admins. Sorry for the trouble. Hope all is well with you. Megahexe 19:15, 01MAY2009 CST

Nice to "talk" to you again! What you were seeing was a leftover of a bad template edit. I have done a minor edit to the page, and hopefully the cache has therefore now been updated so that you can edit the page without the mess. If not, try http://lyricwiki.org/index.php?title=Aqua:Roses_Are_Red&action=edit.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

You actually don't have to edit (i.e. change) the page at all – just entering edit mode and saving without changing anything forces the page to be rebuilt, and the edit won't appear in its history. Alternatively you can append ?action=purge to the URL in the address bar. — 6×9 (Talk) 02:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

True 'nuff! Thanks 6x9 for adding that. As an update, the big guy is ensuring that the cached versions are being cleared/getting a scrubbing, so this problem shouldn't be seen again.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Ahhh, inside information - thanks for that. Megahexe 8:32, 02MAY2009 CST

[edit] Some LW:PN issues

If you could cast your eyes this way for a moment, there are a few issues that have come up recently… I think the policy page could use a few more examples to clear these up. Thanks! — 6×9 (Talk) 15:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] How do I...? Add a Timestamped Signature in Talk pages

Hello Kiefer, What is the wiki code for signing a Talk page with my timestamped signature. I tried --{{User:Unpoete/Signature}}~~ (assuming that if I mixed the signature code with 2 tildes it would show a time) but that just showed my signature. (Of course, my signature is a bit messy so when I do that it'll show the second part of my signature (a line of lyrics) as a dotted box. Though irrelevant to the question at hand.). Where should I be directing my questions re wiki code and related topics to? Thank you! --Unpoete 02:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

We really should make a Help page for signatures, because questions always come up. I always have to look at what I've done, and it's never really very clear even to me! This is what I use:

In my Preferences, in the Signature box, I have {{SUBST:User:Kiefer/Sig}} and the Raw signatures (without automatic link) box checked. (Otherwise {{SUBST:User:Kiefer/Sig}} shows up instead of the fancy-shmancy signature!)

This goes to (of course) User:Kiefer/Sig,

Which in turn contains merely {{User:Kiefer/Signature}}.

This links to User:Kiefer/Signature. (This double template bit is so that all of that code doesn't show up every time I place my signature.) 02:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Now, nowhere in there can I see anything that actually gives the time stamp. Which is a bit puzzling. Perhaps it's just automatically added due to the ~~~~. Give it a try with this info and see what you get. If you still are having problems, I'll look into things further or beg help from Redxx, who is known to be perfect. (At least that's what her publicist says....)

At any rate, five tildes instead of four gives a time stamp if you need it.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Kiefer, Thank you for clear explanation. I've followed your step-by-step instructions, which you can see, this post is the successful product of it. However, you will notice that my signature shows the timestamp on a new line in a dotted box, with a different typeface. I used the following code to sign this response: --~~~~. I'm not sure what is wrong with my signature file? --   ♪ Unpoete    talk    contribs   06:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Try signing again. (There was a carriage return in your sig, which came through when you tried to sign

King_Nee1114 (talk page • contributions • deletions) 09:25, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Kingnee1114lyrics. Signed,    ♪ Unpoete    talk    contribs   23:20, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mickey's Bitch

I think this should be deleted. It doesn't seem valid. User_talk:92.238.92.49 (No response). The page they set up on Wikipedia was also deleted. [4]  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 17:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

They replied on Talk:Mickey's Bitch. However you wish to proceed is fine, but they have a myspace page, etc., so while extremely minor, they appear to be a real band.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   18:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Aah Ok. Thanks. I'd seen everything else but not the download page. I'll leave it be.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 21:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Kiefer's Signature

Hey Kiefer, is your signature broken? I've seen a few recent posts now where it's just your nick in text only.    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   19:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! It was me, by accident. All better now.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] End of line punctuation

On my talk page, you said:

Perhaps a clarification: "Lyrics should follow the artist's format, but if this is not known, capitalize the first letter of each line and use minimal end-of-line punctuation." This applies to a new page being created. Hopefully, when a page is created, the user is using some sort of reference, such as lyrics included with the album. Following the punctuation given is best. If there are no liner lyrics available ("the artist's format"), then one should use minimal end-of-line punctuation. This means punctuation where necessary for clarity, etc. If someone comes by later and has a reference for punctuation (liner lyrics, song book, artist website lyrics, etc.), then they can be inserted. The intention of the instructions isn't for punctuation to be removed if it already exists, though. If one is using some reference, and the punctuation differs, then certainly edits can be made. I'll try to add some information to the Help page to make these distinctions a bit clearer without making the instructions cumbersome.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   00:59, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I believe I've only been doing this on Beatles song pages. As far as I know, The Beatles only included lyrics with 2½ albums: Sgt. Pepper…, The Beatles (aka The White Album), and Side 1 of Magical Mystery Tour. I did not check those for punctuation when I did "… Mr. Kite!", "Blue Jay Way", and "Magical Mystery Tour", among others, so I will go back and check those against the lyrics included with the albums. I will put a note in the edit history that they match the published lyrics, then edit further to match the recordings. And maybe for sense. For example, the back cover from Sgt. Pepper… says, for "… Mr. Kite!" (centre of picture):

Late of Pablo Fanques Fair—what a scene

[...]

As Mr. Kite flys through the ring don't be late

Messrs. K and H. assure the public

. By the standards of normal English, those should be "Fanque's", "flies", and "K.". There needs to be punctuation between "ring" and "don't"; whether to use a comma or a semicolon depends on whether you parse that line as a sentence or as a continuation of the sentence begun in the previous line (as I've always heard it). However, given the pause in the sung words, I'm inclined to put a line break there (which, conveniently, defers the question of parsing to the listener).

But that's not really your point, which I understand as "The guideline isn't rigid. Don't change stuff for the sake of it, especially since a previous user might have had a reliable source".

Hopefully, when a page is created, the user is using some sort of reference, such as lyrics included with the album.

Most of them came from ÜberBot, though, scraped from… somewhere. Regardless of who put them here, though, without a reference, it's difficult for J. Random User to come along and know what the provenance is.

Perhaps an extension to the {{Cert}} template, to certify a specific revision as matching the lyrics included with the album, a specific recording, or whatever. Or sections, like ==Published lyrics== and ==Recorded lyrics== or something. Or subpages for different renderings of the same recording.

But I agree with your gist, that of artistic integrity. The difficulty comes when we try to balance that with

• The lyrics should always be as sung on the recording, even if these differ from the "official" lyrics or those published in the liner notes.

. Peace,—Dah31 05:18, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's always a bit of a balancing act. The words should be what has been recorded, but good references should be followed when it doesn't conflict with the recording. Barring, of course, typographical errors and the like. Sometimes it does end up being a judgment call, but as you said, no reason to change stuff just for the sake of changing it. Best wishes on your future endeavors here at LyricWiki.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] More country-related stuff

Can you make sense of this? Should we use the white region logo thingy as the flag (provided we can find one with a better resolution) or the French tricolore? Or the one that's shown here, which seems to be an unofficial one? — 6×9 (Talk) 00:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

What a mess. A lot of unofficial flags hanging around, it appears. File:GuadeloupeFlag.png appears to be the current official flag. Looks more like a cruise ship flag to me, but I guess it is a Caribbean island, after all.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] New Warning

Is the new warning at the top of the Community Portal refering to me? If so, sorry for changing things before they were discussed. - ezekiel000 08:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. This refers to discussions on the Community Portal where people are taking one side, and are editing the pages being discussed to match their point of view before the discussion has been completed. (And then there are reverts being made by the opposing point of view and then tempers flare, and so on and so on.) As far as I know, you haven't been a part of those discussions and haven't been editing those pages.

It is perfectly okay to make good faith edits to pages without prior discussion. We'd have a very small "Recent Changes" list otherwise! If something is a site-wide change (policy, template, or page format changes, for example) however, then of course discussion in the Community Portal before making those changes is a wise and good move. And during that discussion, no editing of those items should be made until the discussion was completed and a decision made.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh good, I have recently been watching the Community Portal and making changes when things come up, like adding the English wikipedia entry for the discussion you started and adding the country for Roger Whittaker. So I was a little worried I got myself blocked twice when I didn't understand the rules, I didn't want it to happen again. - ezekiel000 17:49, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

No, those are good edits, not relevant to the true topic at hand. No controversy there!  :-] Keep up the good work. The fact that you wrote me a note says a lot about your character.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   17:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Good good, thanks. - ezekiel000 18:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Spirit of Community

I wanted to clarify the issues you brought up about my edits in the community portal here, ...

• The advantage of the RA template over the old method is that with the template we can reach all of those artist pages here, this is the reason why in a few instances we differ on the quality of my edits. My judgment was that by using the template, the fact that artist page has related artists can be seen by others than just the editor who used the old fashioned method, and when RA template or it's successor are available all pages can have more info included. On the other hand I updated many pages which only had an artist name indicated in the old fashioned way, and I also added RA information to many existing pages that had no related artist info at all, in addition to new artist pages that I created with RA. What is the sum total of all those RA edits that I did? Damaging & misguided?
  

• The relevance of Genres & Labels templates with regards to RA is that they all fail to display in TOC, however it seems that RA is receiving harsher judgment, while it is evident that the removal of RA template will create twice as much work for no gain and is truly damaging, and a step forward will require a template, in or outside the TOC, AInfo box, etc.

• In my other incarnation, I started a conversation with another admin regarding how/what to indicate re related artist and artist information. In your experience in real life in your community and neighbourhood, is it possible that a few people come together seed an idea and then when it is at least half baked then propose it to the rest of the community? Is the same possible in the lw community? I tried the same discussion again a few days ago. Do you still think the reaction I received in both instances were appropriate reactions and in the spirit of the community? Does prior conversation by individuals automatically receive a negative score?
  

• Regarding my edits (flagging of artist pages with Category:Pages Needing Artist Identification), Do you think it's appropriate that I remove those flags (~30) and clear the category, or does the information on the category page needs to be improved? Can any issues with the category be discussed on it's talk page with your participation? I have done my research about those artist pages, but I only flagged them so they can be double checked for any further action. Where is my error? In the one instance that this PNAI flag resulted in a move verified by another admin, was the outcome damaging & misguided?
  

• The issue about the NY and NY&CH pages was that even after the split to NY&CH, both pages still contained a mix of both artist tracks, not only against policy, but also against the titles on the art covers (if that is the measure of splitting for this particular artist). See the recent corrections made to those pages. At least now after the recent moves automatic redirects have been created that addresses the problems that existed until recently. I neither practice song page duplication nor do I propose the splitting of artist pages when this action may impede access to the pages.
  

• There are still nearly 300 artist pages in the requests for move category, that I flagged and are being reviewed by another admin before any action is taken, and so far the reviewing admin seems to be satisfied with the reasons for moves and consolidations. You can review the requests and bring any errors on my talk page or the category talk page.
  

I hope I cleared up a few issues without cluttering up the CP ;] Thank you. Night Owl 00:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

You have no idea how happy I am right now. Seriously. This is clear and concise and understandable. It does sort of cut through a few different discussions, but it's got its own, new topic header, therefore: so what?  :-] Please don't take this the wrong way, but I can understand you when you talk by yourself with 6x9, but when you get in the Comm. Portal...I don't know what happens. What comes out is often disjointed and enigmatic and I just often can't follow your meaning. I know that you have been much less aggressive in this incarnation, and have also taken care not to get personal in your comments, so I am definitely appreciative of your efforts. But, on to the points:

• Bringing up the point that templatization allows all those pages with Related Artists to be linked by the template itself is a good point that is certainly on topic for the Another Template Change Suggestion discussion. I don't know how big a plus it is that one could use the What Links Here function in order to update the various Related Artists lists, but it certainly is a point in continuing to use the template's favor. I originally had no thought or inclination of not using the template, though. I merely wanted the old functionality back. The sum total of your edits is probably about even. I'm not sure who latched on to that template first, whether it was you, WillMak, or one of the others that I saw using it, but the only problem that I had with the template or anyone using it was when I saw that a page that I had on my watchlist was edited by you to include the template, but in doing so the extra information about the artists connections was removed. I don't believe I reverted the change, but I did want a way to keep that information with the current template. So...the topic was added to the Portal.

• The Genres & Labels comments may be relevant to one aspect of the RA template, but not to that Another Template Change Suggestion discussion. It's relevant to the TOC conversation. Don't mix the discussions. Too confusing. "...while it is evident that the removal of RA template will create twice as much work for no gain and is truly damaging." There you lost me. You need to explain how its removal creates twice and much work and why there is no gain. As I said in the previous point, I originally had no thought or inclination of not using the template. My comment in the Comm. Portal was "...if the template doesn't serve a purpose for future automation of the ranking system, then we should go back to the original method...". It can easily be adjusted to read "...if the template doesn't serve a purpose, then we should go back to the original method...". Basically, if the template has a purpose, let's keep it. If it doesn't, let's get rid of it. I was, and am, betting that the template can be useful. I'm just hoping that in order to be useful it isn't forced to be burdensome and a nightmare in its use.

• "...with another admin..." Might as well have named names.  :-] I'm not sure what conversations you are specifically speaking of, which is okay. I'll speak in generalities. Talking among yourselves (you and 6x9, usually) is fine. You can come up with ideas together, just like in a real life community. In the past, however, admins got talking on their talk pages or in the Admin Portal and forgot that the site isn't supposed to be run by an admin cabal. As long as items are brought out to the public forum before they are implemented, then there isn't a problem. If Redxx, myself, Ezekiel or GarfieldCollector2009 want to comment, give our suggestions, or praise, or objections, then we have that opportunity. Your recent discussion (which may be what you are referring to) where I brought up a point and a reminder that when the two of you had things ironed out to bring it to the Portal was just that, a "keep talking and when you figure it all out get community approval" reminder. Redxx came in and rambled a bit off-topic and later admitted as much. Hey, we've all been there. As for if previous conversations automatically receive a negative score - often times, yes. You, yourself, tend to bring up a comment in one thread as if it was said in another. ("personal choice?"  :-] ) Unfortunately, that's just part of human nature. We may forgive, but that forgetting part...that's hard. That was probably part of the reason why a certain editor was asked to have a vacation...to let those negative vibes die down on both sides. But a new incarnation was back in what...a day...day and a half? Like we all didn't notice the editing style....  :-] And I think that it only took about a week before the new incarnation was back being vocal. Now as I said, other than the still-confusing nature of some of your comments, the new incarnation is an improvement. If only you could talk as clearly to a group as you do one-on-one. (Also, sort of related to you and 6x9 getting together with ideas. Is it possible to solve the current situations before starting on new projects? That also might help everyone be able to focus on what's going on, if there weren't 10 balls up in the air at once. That's kind of been a concern since you, 6x9, and Team A came on. A little less of a frantic pace would be nice, because I think that in the long run more things would actually get accomplished and fewer projects would find themselves in limbo. Just a suggestion, though...something to keep in mind.)

• As for Category:Pages Needing Artist Identification: Leave it for now. There are only a few dozen in there. Just don't add to the category for now? Make notes for later, perhaps. The problem with the category is as I wrote in the Community Portal, so I don't really want to reiterate it here. I don't want to discuss things on the category's talk page, because the real discussion about this issue is taking place in the Community Portal. That's where the situation, problem, and (hopefully) solution or guideline should be discussed. This same exact conversation (regarding what to do with songs with multiple performers on soundtracks and musicals and Disney songs and charity or tribute pieces) gets brought up at least once a year. And it always goes round and round and round and finally an "editors have to use their best judgment" decision is reached. (I know, for instance, that two years ago our absent admin JeffASaul and myself tried to hash things out a bit with regards to these.) It's imperfect and can be sloppy at times, but in the end, there are so many exceptions to any rule or sets of rules that it just doesn't normally end well. But I'm willing to go over things again each year in the hope that maybe at least some points can be clarified for everyone and perhaps some progress can be made. I'm always hopeful for a "Eureka" moment.

• If you didn't call for multiple pages for the Buffalo Springfield item on the Neil Young retrospective album, then I apologize. I was somehow under the incorrect impression that you felt that such a thing broke the API and therefore needed to be fixed for the API to be an Neil Young track on that Neil Young album and that Neil Young page. Another instance of a communication breakdown, I guess. Consider it forgotten. I see that you've made a comment about the API with regards to splitting Artists, though, which I have a question about...but I'll ask it there.

• I don't mind pages being moved, except if the reason for the move is something that is currently being discussed and mulled over in the Community Portal. Hopefully that other admin is taking that into account. Because if all hell breaks lose because of such a move, that editor will get a day's break. This is for everybody. Yes, colorful everybodies, too. I don't feel the need or have the desire to review 300+ requests. If something goes awry, it will likely be noticed, though.

Hopefully this covers things? It took about 2 hours to compose, so hopefully....  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Your 2 hours were well spent :] I am delighted that we can have a conversation without third parties telling me what it is that I think! So I'll try to clear up what's left.

• I & Herr 6 latched on to the RA template since we both realized that by using the template, our work of indicating RA info won't disappear in +30,000 artist pages. All artist pages using old style non template RA are only findable by inspecting every artist page (lot's of work). This is the main reason RA and any other meta data that needs to be easily retrievable should use templates. We have a discogsArtist/iTunesArtist/mbArtist categories and we need RAartist category just the same.
  

• The reason I stated that removal of tl|RA will create twice as much work for no gain, was this: The direction of discussion was going towards a non template solution, which would mean removal of tl|RA (wasted work 1), then sometime later on everybody else will catch on that a template is necessary so the current or another template will have to be put in (wasted work 2). I think we should keep the RA template or update to a better template instead, and stepping back towards a non template solution will be a big negative (loss of access to RA artists). As it stands now, all RA artists need further work, but the non template RA artists are needles in a haystack, while the ones using the current inadequate template are at our fingertips! Hope that is clear.
  

• My first attempt at discussing RA artists with Herr 6 (my other incarnation) was pretty much snuffed out by one bureaucrat and another colored admin :) I won't bother digging up the convo out of 6's talk archive...but I found that reaction rather aggressive and unnecessary. Technical discussions don't require policing and shutdowns. Discussing complicated issues on CP where the details fly over everybody's head attracts more dissent & confusion rather that useful contribs.
  

• Category Pages Needing Artist ID was just flagged for further research. I intended to leave them alone until they are dealt with after further discussion, one by one. Since I come across artist pages daily, I flag such non artists so they don't disappear again.
  

• The NY / NY&CH issues were my objection to to incomplete/inappropriate artist page splits, left in shambles for months. There are similar case in the Requests for Moves category, and any dubious split by others or any dubious Move requests by me will be double checked by Times, he has got the hang of the issues involved.
  

This conversation has been great help. I apologize for my late reply to your last post. I hope we can discuss issues more often without clutter. And I will comment further on various issues and your recent posts in CP. <Virtual Handshake> Night Owl 14:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

(Since I only have a couple of comments, I'll forgo the bullets....) I agree with your points about keeping the RA template. 100% logical, and what I always thought. Really it's just a question now of implementation. I'm also still a little weirded out by the implications of the PNA category. I'm all for you making a personal list of links in your personal User space, but this is just a little too public, I think. Trust me, the suggested implications are more than I think you see, considering past issues. Regarding the NY/NY&CH splits left in shambles: I don't know the entire history of that. There seems to be a history of conflict over those pages, and whether that began before or after the page was in shambles, I don't know. I could research it, but generalities are fine for what I'd like to say. Pages sometimes don't get finished. I find Artist pages all the time that I start updating with Album Art, checking featured artist references, spelling of titles, adding missing albums in the discography, etc., and often I don't get finished before I have to go offline and do other things like eat and sleep.  :-] Sometimes I come back, sometimes I don't. It's a wiki, and others are welcome to come along and help complete the page. Sometimes a page is in such a state of disarray that I just don't even try to fix it. I realize that I just don't have the time necessary to undo the chaos. If I ever get a chance to do an updating of the main Community Portal page, I'd like to have a link there to a page where we can add pages that we find like that. An "OH MY GAWD, WHAT A MESS!" cry for help page. Don't know how much of this addresses the NY situation...perhaps none of it...but I thought I'd share. Just stay focused when talking in the Comm. Portal, and I think we'll all be much better. Use logic and explain things even if you think we already understand or should understand what you're saying. Over-explaining doesn't cause problems, but under-explaining can. Personally, I work well with logical reasons why something should be done or not done. Sometimes one reason may trump other good and logical reasons, but all-in-all when you slow down you're much more likely to get your point across. Communication is hard in the cyber-realm. It doesn't have to be two hours hard, but.... :-] Since I only have a couple of comments.... Yeah, right! Yeesh. <Virtual Handshake returned>    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   15:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Covers

How do I note on a song's page that the song has been covered? I've added a few covers, but these were on a template that was already added. I just want to know how to start a template. Usually I try to learn these things on my own, but if I am confused, I try to get advice. Brambletalon 21:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs#Covered - ezekiel000 21:31, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Brambletalon 01:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks Ezekiel000! Good job at getting that so quickly!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:59, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Columns

I was wondering if it is possible to use two columns (like Skinny Puppy) but have the album art stay on the same level rather than being above the columns? - ezekiel000 18:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

It's possible by using a simple wikitable, like

{{Album Art|...}}
{|
|style="vertical-align:top; width:50%"|
# '''[[...
|style="vertical-align:top; width:50%"|
# '''[[...
|}

Unfortunately the columns get rather cramped if there are only short song titles (because the table only takes up as much space as it has to), but if you set the table width to 100% it gets bumped below the album art… — 6×9 (Talk) 18:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. - ezekiel000 19:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I wouldn't use such a thing. I'm not sure what the repercussions would be. I'm not even very happy with the Skinny Puppy page using it, but since Night Owl was editing on the page, I figured he'd probably clean that business up eventually.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I've used it for albums that were re-released as it allows you to easily see side by side the differences between the releases. It also keeps the space between the album headings on average the same, which I feel is more aesthetically pleasing. But it can be easily reversed if it causes any problems. I've used it on Feeder, Imogen Heap & Harvey Danger - ezekiel000 23:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm neither dissuading you from using it nor supporting its use. Just letting you know that it's an unofficial formatting style. So, use it where appropriate, but don't go overboard is my advice. Usually we just use a {{h4|1995 Re-Mastered Version}}-type header above the new tracklist. It is easier to compare the two this way, though. And it doesn't appear to muck with the API.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   23:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Mmmm...intersting idea, but personally I think it is unnecessary repetition (of links) when the bonus tracks can just be added on at the end under H4 header. However what I think this format could be very good for is instances such as Feeder:Polythene_(1997), where the order of tracks on the reissue differs from the original. Because it certainly makes it easy to see the variations. ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 08:53, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

You're right the only ones that really need it is Harvey Danger:Little By Little... (2005) and Feeder:Polythene (1997) as they have a different track order rather than just having bonus tracks. - ezekiel000 09:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Ezekiel/Red/AnyoneElseListening...if you do find that this is something that is useful fairly often, then bring a note about it to the Community Portal and we'll see about making it an official formatting choice.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   14:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] One for your collection

[5] — 6×9 (Talk) 04:49, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

A Cut-and-Paste Bomb went off, didn't it? Nice...!  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Jeff Healey Band

Hi

Regarding your edits to the artist page, see this from Help:Redirect
Locating an artist who uses more than one name, such as "Johnny Cougar", "John Cougar", and "John Cougar Mellencamp" all getting you to the artist's modern name of John Mellencamp.
What did I miss? How come John Mellencamp page and it redirects are fine but Jeff Healey pages are in need of a remedy? thanks Night Owl 18:40, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Who says the John Mellencamp page is fine? I don't believe that I said so. That wasn't edited to be that way after the discussion that we just had in the Community Portal, was it? If you are asking if I can fix the John Mellencamp page, since I am a John Mellencamp fan and have nearly his entire discography, then I'll be glad to. Provided I'm not distracted by other problems, of course.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

The redirects you will be leaving on the Mellencamp page and his song and album pages will be reverted by Janitor, as they will all be links to redirects. Please see discussion on 6 times 9's talk page. Than ks! Night Owl 20:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

What redirects? I'm going to link to the correctly-named pages. At any rate, if Janitor is doing something it no longer should, then Janitor should basically not do it any longer.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:19, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Redirects from the four different variations of the artist name, which are all the same entity, Here is Teknomunk's note on that:

In particular, I would suggest that #3 was instead: If an artist's discography is under a wide variety of names, but is essentially the output of a single entity with perhaps minor variations, then it should have one main artist page, with redirects to this page from the various incarnations' pages.
Night Owl 20:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't be linking to the redirects from Johnny Cougar, John Cougar, & John Cougar Mellencamp, so you've still lost me. As long as we're digressing, don't confuse what teknomunk is saying in his #3 as to mean that he's speaking of the Jeff Healey situation. He's speaking of the John Mellencamp situation, actually. Notice how the Jeff Healey albums and the Jeff Healey & The Jazz Wizards intermingle with the The Jeff Healey Band items. They aren't a single entity. They share a single entity, the focal point of Mr. Healey, but they are fairly different (from what I understand, style-wise, musician-wise, etc., although I was a 90s Jeff Healey fan, I stopped after then.) Also, if one was to consider them all a single entity, then that situation revolves around Jeff Healey, and so the Artist page should most likely be at Jeff Healey. But then, that would be something that would likely get discussed on the talk page. I'll be back later tonight.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:47, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

No Problem, I didn't think this matter will be covered in 15 minutes :]

The reason all the pages are in The Jeff Healey Band name space is because most of the works were released under that name

1. TJHB:1988, 1990, 1992, 1995, two in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2005
2. Jeff Healey (2002, 2004, 2008),
3. JH&TJW in 2006.

So TJHB was the name most often used, hence the name space.

Mr. Healey is the key artist of all the three artistic works in different genres (which included other individuals)

What name the albums were released as is already indicated on the artist page. We have the alias parameter for Song & album headers to correctly display the performing artist (which I had already used on the artist pages and the album pages). As was mentioned in CP, such matters are to be discussed on the artist talk page (which I have already started on TJHB talk page), and In the ArtistInfo box I have also indicated that all pages were filed under TJHB. It doesn't appear that any policy or guideline is being broken by keeping all of his works under one roof and in one namespace. to be continued... thanks Night Owl 22:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Highest Number of Releases does not necessarily equate to what the main Artist page should be, though. As I wrote, if Jeff Healey is the Sun around which the other entities included on the page revolve, then Jeff Healey should be the Artist page location. True, The Jeff Healey Band has the most releases, but would you consider Jeff Healey & The Jazz Wizards a derivative of The Jeff Healey Band, or are they both a derivative of Jeff Healey, himself. As the Jeff Healey and the Jeff Healey & The Jazz Wizards are jazz albums, and The Jeff Healey Band is a rock/blues ensemble, they are really not related as teknomunk meant anyway. They are not "essentially the output of a single artist with perhaps minor variations." But that was a digression. If I wanted to push the topic myself at this time, I'd bring it to the talk page. Another Jeff Healey fan might want to move it, for the reasons I gave, and I may decide to pursue it later if I run across the page in the future, but for now...there are bigger fish.

Speaking of which.... An album by The Jeff Healey Band should be in the The Jeff Healey Band namespace. An album by Jeff Healey should be in the Jeff Healey namespace. They can all be listed on The Jeff Healey Band page (or the Jeff Healey page or whatever), but as their correct pagenames. To do otherwise does break pagenaming policy.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

And I have already opened the discussion on the existing artist page so that it can be discussed. Only today another admin decided to start moving the pages without discussing it on the artist talk page.

The idea was to have specific cases discussed on the artist talk pages to avoid edit wars and UserWarnings, and to inform future editors of why certain decisions were made, as was indicated by teknomunk. Night Owl 03:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Once again, pagenaming policy isn't a discussable item on Artist pages. How to split/merge - yes. What to name pages - no.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Can you please provide a link to the relevant policy page that describes how/where it is decided what is minor/major variations of artist name, and where I have made an error as you seem to be implying? As I had stated on CP, whichever course of action is taken, it can be labeled as personal preference edit by subsequent editors. Thank you Night Owl 04:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

LW:PN.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

There is nothing on LW:PN about artsit name variations etc, which is the main issue of discussion with JHB or Mellencamp, and no indication on what is the policy on handling these cases! This is where we need clear policy! Similar situation with Delfonics/The Delfonics, there are plenty of artist pages whose editing will be labeled as stirring trouble. Night Owl 05:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not discussing this matter with you any more. I have made the situation clear. You see or don't see what you want.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   06:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

There is nothing on artists using name variations on either LW:PN or in the entire Policy category, even after the CP discussion. Night Owl 06:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] This page...

LyricWiki:Privacy_policy it's linked to at the bottom of every LW page but it hasn't actually got any content..and just keeps getting deleted?  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 23:52, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. It's a common spam attack target, but Sean never wrote a site policy, and he's really the one that has to do it. You could always add it to his platter....    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Nah, I figure he's got enough to do ;)  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 07:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Do you recall?

...there was once a page that looked like this?

Well..."There once was an ugly duckling...": Eurovision Song Contest

And how's about this for a truly 'orrible and flaw ridden page: 尾崎豊 (Ozaki Yutaka) It's almost frightening!

And before you ask, NO, I'm not going anywhere near it ;)  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 17:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

All I see is a beautiful swan. I applaud your artistry. And 6x9 took care of that other page. It was a nice cut-and-paste-from-Wikipedia job. He nuked it with a redirect. Sometimes the simplest solution is the best one, eh?  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Agreed.. I was sorely tempted but I chickened out..Good on (yer) 6! Will would've assisted us in our endeavors I'm sure, but he's a bit tied up at the moment assisting a user on my talk page  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 12:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{caption}}

Since that template is meant to replace L1 headers, wouldn't it be better if it appeared in the TOC like a L1 header? — 6×9 (Talk) 20:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

It certainly could. Are you thinking of using it somewhere?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   20:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

It could be used for all those artists where various incarnations/name variations are listed on one page, like Beefheart (one section for His, one for The). A TOC entry would be useful in those cases. — 6×9 (Talk) 20:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

From following the "What Links Here" bit to my archive page, one of the concerns about L1 that inspired the template's creation was that L1s mucked with the API. At the time, I didn't think that it was possible to insert the Caption into the TOC. If you can do it...awesome! See what happens. Although the Beefheart usage is probably not the best, since the various names are scattered, and not in groovy, contained eras. Probably would be good for John Mellencamp and the Jefferson Airplane-type pages, though. Which is, I think, what it was sort of for in the first place. Let me know how it works out. Any "prettying up" you want to do, feel free, too. It was a quick creation on my part.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually Beefheart is split in two eras, at least as far as studio albums are concerned. Everything up to "Trout Mask Replica" is His ("Mirror Man" was released later, but recorded in '68), everything later is The. Things only get messy when you want to include compilations… Dunno how important it is though – the change from "His" to "The" was neither marked by a strong stylistic change nor by a radically different line-up. Guess I'll leave it alone for now. — 6×9 (Talk) 22:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Foundation (band)

Banner says Due to technical restrictions, "Foundation" is filed under "Foundation (band)". AFAICT the only technical restriction is that bots had trouble with "Foundation" (from the talk pages in WLH), which I doubt is a sufficient reason…? Just thought I'd ask before moving it back. — 6×9 (Talk) 20:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure why ES moved it. Perhaps it was part of a disambiguation project? Go ahead and move it.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Songs in multiple languages

There has been no recent activity on this thread. Unless somebody has an objection, I'm going to go ahead and update the help pages and start work on pages that follow to reflect the discussion sometime Friday. As you were part of the discussion, I thought I would let you know.
- teknomunk (talk,E,歌,A) 22:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] One last question…

…then I'll leave you alone, promise! If an album and its songs should have the artist part of the pagename as it appears on the cover, no matter what the artist page is named, wouldn't that also apply for disambigued artists? So if we had "Artist (UK)" and "Artist (US)", shouldn't all songs still be "Artist:Song Title" (unless both recorded a song with the same title)? — 6×9 (Talk) 01:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Would be nice if it could be done but I think it could get very confusing and messy link wise. I detest disambig pages with a loathing, they are so blinkin' ugly ;)  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 02:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Not messier than this, certainly. (Look at the Song template in edit mode. Then imagine how it would look with more than one album.) — 6×9 (Talk) 02:31, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Hrm. I'm trying to think about what was discussed in the past with regards to this. My personal inclination is to have all "Artist (UK)" items have "Artist (UK)" as the Artist. Just as some albums and songs have disamb. add-ons, so too do some Artists. I'm not sure if there is a functional reason why Album and Song pages would have to have the add-on, though. I guess that it would make that Song template a little easier, wouldn't it? I not a super-strong proponent either way, so if you have thoughts.... (That Song template on the Beefheart page is a bit of a mess, but it wouldn't be quite so bad if we allowed a link to a redirect to the assigned Artist page in it. It's complex because of an interest in making it as "neat" as possible visually and functionally, if not code-wise.)    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:54, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Basically what I'm trying to say is, if we want album and song page names as correct as possible, even if that means an artist prefix that differs from the artist page name, why shouldn't we extend the same courtesy to disambigged artists?

The problem with links to redirects is that they get in the way of finding semi-lonely pages (those with only a redirect linking to them). Though that will only become an issue once Sean or someone actually produces a method to find them… — 6×9 (Talk) 03:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds logical enough to me. Perhaps there is a problem, but I don't see one. Redxx...is that you lurking around the corner? Any thoughts before the Comm. Portal?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'm really understanding this this is borderline technical so my brain starts switching off. All I will say is that whilst this automatic updating of redirects may be a great idea, I wish there was some way we could make redirects remain redirects (I'm sure you know what I mean). That would reduce the number of names needed on the Beefheart song page (I think).

As for disambig song and album pages, I would prefer not to have to add the disambig part, i.e. (UK) to the song and album pages. If we made redirects that remained redirects this shouldn't be a problem. Regardless of this it is hardly likely that there would ever be two identical pages, i.e. the same song performed by both disambig artists, they both release an album entltled the same in the same year, etc. Sorry I know that's not much help.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 20:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] in reference to Catman listing

Apologies to you, I thought "related artists" meant "artists similar in lyrics/music" and did not realize it literally meant "relatives of artists." Thank you for correcting the embarrassing error.

A Levine

No problem...it's a common misconception that the Related Artist section is a "Similar Artists" section. But "Related Artists" aren't those that artists that are "relatives of the artist", although they can be. They are merely other artists that have worked closely with the artist in question. For example, on the Paul Simon page, there should be a link to the Art Garfunkel page as well as the Simon and Garfunkel page. Paul McCartney should link to Wings, The Beatles, John Lennon, etc. John Lennon should link back to Paul McCartney, as well as to his son Julian Lennon. Dolly Parton could link to Kenny Rogers, because they are well-known as collaborators. But The Who shouldn't link to The Rolling Stones just because they are both British rock groups. The Genre categories, etc. should help with that.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   16:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] one final question about Catman listing

Thanks again.

I am supposed to complete one final task then will have completed the listing -- but again, do not know how to do it. The Catman's first two albums are on iTunes (see below) but do not know how to find proper codes to place them here at LyricWiki. How do I find the codes and what am I doing wrong?

See: http://www.apple.com/search/ipoditunes/?q=catman+cohen

A Levine

Try using the Linkmaker and use the album column...it's a lot easier. (At least I think so. Quicker for me, too.) The first album's link is i=57789253&id=57789491&s=143441&uo=6.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   01:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

You may find this section helpful too Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs#iTunes  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 03:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Kiefer:

Think I finished the LyricWiki listing, thanks to your assistance. Also applied for a Discogs listing, so not sure how long that will take. The artist is listed on WikiMusicGuide but may not conform to certain criteria required for Wikipedia listing, although it's been more than three years since application for a Wikipedia application, denied at that time. Would probably be helpful if some third party made the application rather than the artist agent.

Final question: at what point will the LyricWiki songs show up in a Google search?

Thanks again for your very useful guidance, learned a few things.

A Levine

@Kiefer: and one final note....a 100 buck donation has been made to LyricWiki on behalf of the Catman. Thought you should know. Thanks.

A Levine

I'm not sure how often Google spiders through the site. I just checked Google and nothing much shows up, does it? Hopefully soon. (From looking at the cached version of this page, it appears that the last time Google came around was on June 21.)

On behalf of Sean and all of the users on the site, thank you for the donation. I don't know how many ad-clicks that donation is worth, but I'm sure it's a bunch!  :-]

I'm not sure if you want your phone number here. I've removed it, because essentially a wiki is a permanent record of everything. If you'd like to automatically sign your posts, you can use four tildes (~~~~) to do so. There's even a way to make your signature a little more individualized, like mine is, if you're interested.

Best wishes, and happy editing!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   12:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: Showing on Google now :-)  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 16:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you have the new-and-improved Google? Because I still get the same five items, none of which are the actual Artist page or any of his Song pages. England must be much more awesome than us here in the States.  :-]    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   04:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

That'll teach me for answering posts when I'm tired. There isn't a link to artist page in this post and I just saw "Catman" with links to LyricWiki and thought those must be the ones in question. Sorry. So no, same as you.  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 05:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

As an update: Things are on Google now! They were updated on July 6th.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Another case of Does This Really Belong Here

Sven Jenter – I couldn't find any information on this other than the officialSite, but it appears that the author confused "lyrics" with "poetry". (Probably because the German word "Lyrik" means "lyric poetry" rather than "lyrics"…) Delete the whole thing? — 6×9 (Talk) 01:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

From what I can tell, he writes lyrics, but doesn't have music to go with them. His main presence on the web is on Facebook, MySpace, & Twitter. So, unless there's an actual recording made using his lyrics, they should be deleted. I have put a note on the contributor's talk page. If there isn't a reply soon, then go ahead with the deletions.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Multiple versions of the same song

On the page for the artist Camper Van Beethoven, the same song appears three times, with the same lyrics:

1. (Don't You Go To) Goleta
2. (Don't Ya Go To) Goleta
3. Goleta

It looks like the bot got confused and grabbed the song several times under different names. Is there some official way to delete the extra entries? What would happen if I moved #2 and #3 to "(Don't You Go To) Goleta" when that song already exists? Thanks. Beowulf6561 12:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes the same song is released under slightly different titles (e.g. on compilations or live albums). More often though, users submit lyrics to some site under a title that isn't quite correct, and since all lyric sites steal from each other ;-) pretty soon each one will have every name variation. Therefore, deleting the wrong pages wouldn't do much good, since the Bot would just re-create them on the next run. Instead you can redirect them to the correctly titled page, which has the added advantage that a user looking under the wrong name will still find it.

Moving a page over an existing one isn't possible for non-admins, as that would require deleting the target page first. — 6×9 (Talk) 18:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Question...

marks. I noticed you removed one. I often remove commas and full stops but I often add question marks to make sense of the lyrics. Wrong move?  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 03:35, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

No. I essentially reverted the previous "add punctuation to every line" edit with a few things kept. (Senseless, I suppose, but I'm a bit grumpy tonight.  :-]) I didn't notice the question mark, and I probably would have kept it if I had.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok thank you. I just wanted to be sure. Here's a smile for you >> :-)  ♫_♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪ ^Actions _Words 03:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)