Revision as of 17:23, 14 September 2012 editFezmar9 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers17,104 edits →Recent edit← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:55, 15 September 2012 edit undoErpert (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers48,272 edits Sigh...Next edit → | ||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
:::# I'm making a big deal about this because you are listing songs that are not singles as singles. It's about as intelligent as listing these songs as bananas. They're clearly not bananas, so they should not be listed as such. It shouldn't matter if there's a guideline (which there is) nor should it matter if ] is lacking sources (it's linked in all single infoboxes and used in discussions to define a single, clearly its validity is supported by the community), I have provided more than adequate amounts of reasons for why this should not be. | :::# I'm making a big deal about this because you are listing songs that are not singles as singles. It's about as intelligent as listing these songs as bananas. They're clearly not bananas, so they should not be listed as such. It shouldn't matter if there's a guideline (which there is) nor should it matter if ] is lacking sources (it's linked in all single infoboxes and used in discussions to define a single, clearly its validity is supported by the community), I have provided more than adequate amounts of reasons for why this should not be. | ||
:::# I know that above you said you're not trying to ] the article, but by reverting all of my edits without giving a reason or by completely avoiding the subject in conversation, you're behaving in a way that's similar to owning the article. ] (]) 17:23, 14 September 2012 (UTC) | :::# I know that above you said you're not trying to ] the article, but by reverting all of my edits without giving a reason or by completely avoiding the subject in conversation, you're behaving in a way that's similar to owning the article. ] (]) 17:23, 14 September 2012 (UTC) | ||
:::*Excuse me, but I included an explanation in the edit summary of ''all'' the edits; did you just not read them? ], so I'm taking this to ]. (BTW, that "bananas" analogy is just that.) '''<span style="color:orange;">Erpert</span>''' <small><sup><span style="color:green;">]</span> | <span style="color:yellow;">]</span></sup></small> 00:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:55, 15 September 2012
Discographies NA‑class | |||||||
|
Recent edit
- As far as my slight revert, I can explain several things:
- I do not see how WP:BOLDTITLE applies because mention of the title doesn't sound right in the first sentence as is (if you can rework it though, more power to you).
- The sources I listed clearly state that the songs I listed are all singles.
- I do not see why a non-album single should have its own section.
All in all, if a few things seem out of place still, well, that's why the article has an {{underconstruction}} tag (and just for the record, I am not trying to own the article.) Erpert 02:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- The long-ago established consensus was not to bold the article's title in the lead of a discography article. This practice has been carried out in numerous, if not all, featured discography articles such as Audioslave discography and Faith No More discography.
- You have not listed any sources claiming these songs are singles, and it's kind of bizarre to claim that you have. Please read Misplaced Pages's article Single (music), which clearly outlines and defines what a single is. It's a type of release that can be obtained independent of the parent album (if a parent album even exists). For example, here is where I can obtain the single for "Comeback Kid" and here is where I can obtain the single for "Tell 'Em". Where can I obtain the single for "Demons" or "End of the Line"? I don't see any physical or digital copies of any of the songs that you're adding, though Discogs (not considered a reliable source for Misplaced Pages, but is generally a good place to start) does show radio-promo copies of "Infinity Guitars", "Rill Rill" and "Riot Rhythm".
- (A) "Irreplaceable" was not released as a single, and (B) it's common practice to separate out songs not released on an album by the band. For examples from featured discography articles, see Foo Fighters discography#Other appearances, Nine Inch Nails discography#Miscellaneous, Linkin Park discography#Other appearances and Smoking Popes discography#Other appearances.
- Your "slight revert" also: changes the number of singles to 8 when there are 7 listed, but only 2 are truly singles; changes Gregory Kohn incorrectly back to Gregory Horn; incorrectly reintroduces a source that doesn't even mention Gregory Kohn, yet is being used to source the claim that he was the director for "Comeback Kid". Fezmar9 (talk) 08:10, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, I added a source that clearly states that "Comeback Kid" was the official first single and that it was co-directed by Gregory Kohn (which you could have easily obtained from the "Comeback Kid" article, btw). Speaking of that, the "Demons" article has the actual single listed; and as for your suggestion to look at Single (music), that article hardly has any sources, so I don't really know how reliable that is. Also...
“ | It's common practice to separate out songs not released on an album by the band. | ” |
- Is that a guideline though? If so, where is it? I'm not trying to be difficult, but I just don't see why you're making a big deal about this. Erpert 08:28, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- Nothing you're saying makes any logical sense to me anymore. When you say "which you could have easily obtained from the "Comeback Kid" article," that's exactly what I did. With this edit I took the exact same Stereogum story from the exact same article you did. You really need to be more careful when you mass revert someone's edits.
- The article Demons (Sleigh Bells song) only states the song is a single because you're the only person who has edited the article. None of the four sources on that article call it a single. You also removed my notability tag there with no reason provided.
- Speaking of removing something with no reason provided, you also removed all of the citation needed tags from this article. These songs were not released as singles as far as I can see. Above you said you already provided sources, but I sure don't see any. Now I'm challenging the information and requesting that sources be provided. If none can, the information will be removed.
- I'm making a big deal about this because you are listing songs that are not singles as singles. It's about as intelligent as listing these songs as bananas. They're clearly not bananas, so they should not be listed as such. It shouldn't matter if there's a guideline (which there is) nor should it matter if Single (music) is lacking sources (it's linked in all single infoboxes and used in discussions to define a single, clearly its validity is supported by the community), I have provided more than adequate amounts of reasons for why this should not be.
- I know that above you said you're not trying to own the article, but by reverting all of my edits without giving a reason or by completely avoiding the subject in conversation, you're behaving in a way that's similar to owning the article. Fezmar9 (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- Excuse me, but I included an explanation in the edit summary of all the edits; did you just not read them? You just don't seem to care about my explanations for some reason, so I'm taking this to WP:3. (BTW, that "bananas" analogy is just that.) Erpert 00:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)