User talk:Wikkitywack

Archives

Archive 1 (Welcome! + 2010)

i completely agree that guest vocalist deserve proper credit...i was just thinking that a single, in most cases being a release with more than one tracks, should be formatted in the same way as an EP...and speaking of which, I Dream in Colour should definitely be considered an EP, containing 7 tracks of 42 min in total

i remember reading this stuff yesterday, but i did miss out on the markup for singles, so pardon that...but do you get my logic ? i just think it would make more sense if singles were formatted as EPs rather than album tracks, if they contain more than one track...

other than that, i just thought it looked a bit neater with a space before the bullets following italics... I has unique username (talk) 21:36, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you were right on the Enver Gjokaj birth date now that I see he his twin is in there. That being said, my logic behind changing it to the imdb reference was:

A. As rare a name as it is, I wasn't sure (until I saw his twin was there too) that it was the same Enver Gjokaj. B. My sister is an actress and edits her own imdb account, so I assumed everyone did the same. I.e. I thought the actual Enver Gjokaj would have put his birthday in there. But now I realize that must not be the case for everybody. C. Yes, it was the California Birth Index...indirectly. It was the CA birth index from a random geneological website I had never heard of, and considering how long imdb has been around I thought it was more reliable.

Regardless, mea culpa on the mistake. I wonder why the birth date is so different on imdb though. His twin has the same wrong birth date there too.Sdbulldog (talk) 06:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bobby Charles has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. memphisto 16:01, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Allen Toussaint has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. memphisto 16:05, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tompall & The Glaser Brothers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. memphisto 16:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pigeonhed has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. memphisto 16:49, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Satchel has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. memphisto 16:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As long as he/she is using the Templates for deletion process, there's is not much that I can do to help you. I don't know much about templates as they are applied to musicians and don't use them enough to have a qualified opinion about whether these are useful or not. My involvement was to correct the misuse of a speedy-deletion tag (something that I do know a bit about). If you think the templates are useful, the place to present your evidence and to make your case is at TfD. That page is frequented by folks who are much more expert about the proper uses of templates in Wikipedia.

Stick to the facts, don't take anything personally and you'll probably get some good feedback. Might take a while, though. Be patient. Sorry I can't be more help. Rossami (talk) 20:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Put simply, a Navbox exists to aid navigation between EXISTING articles. And kindly stop creating redirects from singles to albums to disguise Navbox red links - Here She Comes (Boney James song) on Template:Boney James

For further advice please read the guidance essay Wikipedia:Navigation templates and the editing guideline Wikipedia:Red link. The discussions the last time your templates appeared at Templates for discussion - Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 December 13, and the deleting admin's comment on your talk page - User talk:Wikkitywack/Archive 1#Navbox_templates

Rather than putting all the information in Navbox musical artist, have you considered expanding the artist's own discography section? memphisto 10:54, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

This includes when raising move requests, see WP:RM#Requesting a single page move. Typing in your user name or using cut and paste (as you appear to have done at Talk:Roger Joseph Manning, Jr.) gives no wikilinks, inconveniencing other editors. Andrewa (talk) 20:00, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply on my talk page. I have replied there and at User talk:Necrothesp#Promoting moves to controversial. Andrewa (talk) 05:25, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Zumpano has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. memphisto 12:14, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is obvious you put a lot of effort into Music Navboxes. Here is a link to your version of Template:Flamin' Groovies [1], and this is the template now all the red links, non-links and redirect links have been removed. Template:Flamin' Groovies

The original discography in the article Flamin' Groovies was pretty poor [2], and so I have attempted to merge the info from your version of the Navbox into the discography: Flamin' Groovies#Discography. I know absolutely nothing about the Flamin' Groovies, but I think the inclusion of your info has improved the article.

Please can you consider focusing on the musical articles proper; because as shown by the example above, your contributions do help in improving Wikipedia. memphisto 18:18, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the infobox, I very much disagree that listing members in order of departure "has a more logical flow to it." I think it's illogical. Since we disagree, we consult the template guidelines, which side with me. There, that's solved. Regarding the former member listing in the article - I'm less concerned about that, and I can't even remember how they are currently listed, but I think you should reconsider your system of listing by date of departure. As you yourself point out, that puts El Duce smack in the middle of listings, which you sought to compensate for by sticking him at the beginning of the article. But what's the point of a system that has to be compensated for by being broken for "important members"? And who decides who is "important" anyway? Personally, I'm against it, and I haven't seen any other editors using this system. Colinclarksmith (talk) 16:07, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, FYI, I wasn't trying to be jerk with my last edit summary on the Mentors article, it was a legitimate typo (that is, I meant to say "chronological by date of joining"). Colinclarksmith (talk) 16:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article I Wanna Be Your Pants has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No references demonstrate notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Oo7565 (talk) 09:32, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move The Pain and the Great One - this is correct per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization). For example: The Owl and the Pussycat and The Cat and the Canary. memphisto 21:44, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please LOOK INSIDE! these "the Pain and the Great One" books. "The Great One" seems to be merely a typographical aberration: [3] [4] [5] [6]. memphisto 22:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take your word on these things. I've noticed many band templates that, after the band falls out of general popularity, the articles/templates get filled with all sorts of misinformation, in good and bad faith, and many of the Sugar Ray articles are in rather rough shape, so I jumped to the conclusion that the template was in similar shape, as I didn't recall those songs being singles. I guess they were all merely the type of singles that failed to chart (which explains why they don't have their own articles, where I would usually go to quickly check and verify such things.) Sergecross73 msg me 02:54, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just letting you that you can't actually move an article to an italicised title. You have to use {{italic title}} to make the title appear to be in italics (this template is built in {{Infobox album}}, {{Infobox book}} and so on). However, the italic title template ignores brackets because brackets are generally disambiguation that should be ignored. In these cases, you need to add {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Name of article here''}} below the infobox. Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that you don't move article to make the title in italics, you use the italic title template or DISPLAYTITLE (which is what I've done for the Westing (By Musket and Sextant) article). Best, Jenks24 (talk) 07:31, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring after a review of the reverts you have made on Katie Morgan. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively.

Please be particularly aware, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Tabercil (talk) 15:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anywhere but Here (film), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Marie Wilson and Sally Taylor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited I'll Sleep When I'm Dead (An Anthology), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hindu Love Gods (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:TheBasketballDiaries soundtrack.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:53, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Down in Front is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Down in Front until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Kavdiamanju (talk) 03:58, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:X-Ray Spex has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Lachlan Foley (talk) 06:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Sponge destroytheboy.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Whoever You Are requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:56, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wikkitywack. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wikkitywack. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Switch Board Susan, Wikkitywack!

Wikipedia editor Robvanvee just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Could use some expansion. Otherwise nice work!

To reply, leave a comment on Robvanvee's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Thanks for uploading File:HuffamooseDeathOfCool.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikkitywack:

Your name was on the page for deleting the link on Craig Chaquico on the Jefferson Starship page. I would like to reinstate the box at the bottom of that page under external links and put Chaquico's name there along with, Kantner, Balin, Slick, and Papa John that are currently there . He was an original founding member of the band. I understand it was deleted because there weren't enough blue links and that I need to link it to a least 2 articles. I'm wondering if that is correct, and if you might assist me in setting it back up? I'm relatively new to Wikipedia and haven't had any experience besides text edits and uploading photos. Any suggestion or assistance would be greatly appreciated.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 22:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Hello, Wikkitywack. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wikkitywack. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Showaddywaddy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 15:09, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:PorkysRevenge soundtrack.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-free album cover being used in a decorative manner in Porky's Revenge!#Soundtrack. Non-free album cover art is generally allowed to be used for primary identification purposes in stand-alone articles about albums, but its use in other articles is generally only allowed when the cover art itself is the subject of sourced critical commentary as explained in WP:NFC#cite_note-3 and the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8 is evident. There is no such commentary for this particular album cover anywhere in the article, and the use of soundtrack album cover art in articles about films or TV programs is generally not allowed for this reason as explained in WP:FILMSCORE.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:23, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's better if you work on the article in your sandbox – if you keep it in mainspace without any decent sources, it's going to keep being redirected by other editors before you get a chance to work on it. I don't deny the group were important, and that a couple of its members went on to bigger things afterwards, but it doesn't mean that that everything by the group is worthy of a Wikipedia article, especially if there is nothing more than a passing mention, like in the Trouser Press biography, even if you personally think it's an important release. To pass WP:NALBUM it will probably need reviews of the EP from publications of the time. Richard3120 (talk) 15:43, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wild Colonials has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wikkitywack. Thank you for your work on Crawling from the Wreckage. User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 18:26, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came across A Family Album and it does not appear to meet notability requirements for albums. I intend to redirect it to The Verve Pipe, but wanted to give you notice in case you can find sources to support notability that I didn't find. I'll check back on the article in a week to see if there have been any changes. Cheers! Schazjmd (talk) 14:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - please revert back to A Family Album. I was late in seeing your message - I'll provide links tonight. Wikkitywack (talk) 16:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find sources to support the notability requirements, you can revert the redirect and add them at that time. Schazjmd (talk) 17:02, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Verve family album.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Every source I see has the same order that I originally put in the article, e.g. https://music.apple.com/us/album/little-bit-of-sun/1699680116 and https://musicbrainz.org/release/095ce9bc-3dd4-4ae6-aeaa-4f9ad2f716cf. What is your source that the tracks are swapped? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:36, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting! For some reason Apple (and MusicBrainz apparently) have swapped the tracks...

I just imported the album onto my computer from CD, and the track listing is 5. "Keep Me in Motion" -> 6. "All the Time" - and it's not a misprint, I just verified by listening.

Here's a photo of the back cover: https://www.allmusic.com/album/little-bit-of-sun-mw0004106333

Maybe just add a note I guess? (Because for some reason, every digital copy I've seen has it your way... including Bandcamp https://semisonicband.bandcamp.com/album/little-bit-of-sun)

Also, I noticed you changed the composer credits back - if you could revert my edits there, that would be great because alphabetical order is incorrect. Tracks 1, 2, 6 ("All the Time"), 8, 11 & 12 have Dan Wilson listed first, indicating he's the primary songwriter, with the other songwriters listed as I laid out. Compare that with Tracks 5 ("Keep Me in Motion") & 7 which have Jacob Slichter & John Munson listed first, respectively, and we have a clear pattern of hierarchical intent. Wikkitywack (talk) 07:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weird. Thanks.

Nothing in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Album_article_style_advice#Credits obliges us to use any particular order. How is alphabetical order "wrong"? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If someone is listed first, it means they were the primary songwriter (like in the examples from this album). If you bury that in alphabetization, it gives the wrong impression. I've been meticulously documenting composer credits from the liner notes for years, and the alphabetical swap is clearly a thing in almost all cases.

Sometimes things can get tricky, where primary songwriter-ship may not be clear - e.g. Lyrics by Scott Weiland, Music by Dean DeLeo - and alphabetization might make sense.

Alphabetization would also make sense of course if it's something like, "All songs written by Foo Fighters" - and you wanted to write out the names of the members.

But if it's plain-as-day "Dan Wilson / Amy Allen" & "John Munson / Dan Wilson", then that should be observed, or the information is in fact incorrect.

Cheers! Wikkitywack (talk) 08:00, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of ways that songwriters are credited. Sometimes, that is what it means, sometimes not. Is there any guideline or policy that demands we list songwriters in any particular order? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"There are a lot of ways that songwriters are credited." Sure. That's essentially what I'm saying as well. I'm mostly meaning to talk about clear examples like the ones we have here. Are you saying "Dan Wilson / Amy Allen", "Dan Wilson / Amy Allen / Yves Rothman", "Dan Wilson / Lori McKenna", "Dan Wilson / Jim James", "Jacob Slichter / Dan Wilson", etc. are not purposeful - or are somehow misprints? Because I feel like that should require some evidence...

When it's clear, it's clear.

That seems like a good guideline/policy. Wikkitywack (talk) 18:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That could be a perfectly sensible one. Until or unless there is such a policy, I always just use alphabetical order for the actual songwriters, not whatever is in liner notes. What would you do in the case of someone who actually wrote a song but wasn't credited for it? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:47, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"whatever is in liner notes" - you make it sound so random! Whereas alphabetical order is, in fact, random! You have no idea if it is correct - liner notes on the other hand, give us some actual information to go on!

I must say, I don't understand your reasoning. You seem to be taking something more accurate and making it less accurate...

As to the second question - you'd write a note about it and back it up with evidence, I should think! Wikkitywack (talk) 06:51, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, liner notes are random: they are different in different albums and there is no consistency in the liner notes industry. As I pointed out, liner notes are information, but they are not always accurate. Alternately, there is nothing random or inaccurate about alphabetical order. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:54, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You must be referencing Greatest Hits packages or something... in that case, I would agree there are inconsistencies - Greatest Hits should not be trusted as a primary source.

Liner notes of the *actual album itself*, however, are *not random*. Where do you get that?

Alphabetical order is just something you made up. It's random. It's inaccurate. You have no information that suggests it is the proper order. That should not be allowed. Information should trump lack of information. Wikkitywack (talk) 07:46, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I was saying is that they have no common style or semantic meaning. So from album to album, what songwriting credits mean or how they are written is random. Also, I did not make up the alphabet and the alphabet is not inaccurate. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:49, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Wax ecstatic album sampler.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:53, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]