FANDOM

2,054,106 Pages

Archive Index


"Something interfered"

I am, as of now, suspending my contributions to any Wikia projects. They introduced a new anti-adblock script which displays a pitiful "error" message that "something interfered with the loading". Pathetic! The page worked fine for 5 seconds until you replaced the whole content with the message. And yes, I know I am blocking some scripts, because I will not allow shady, non-trustworthy third party sites' java script additions to be executed on my private computer. Surfing while allowing those companies to track my every mouse movement is an inacceptable imposition on me. It'd be okay if it was genuine ads that are pushed to me, but tracking companies do actively collect data, which is not okay. They are companies of which I do not know what they are going to do with the data, how I can legally restrict the usage and distribution of my data, or I already know they operate in a way that is against my believes of how tracking should be done (i. e. disregarding my "Do Not Track" setting and the opt-out choices I have made). And the mere fact that there are more companies involved than I have fingers on both hands just shows how carelessly Wikia wished to distribute my data. Those companies are:

  • advertising.com
  • casalemedia.com
  • scorecard-research.com
  • krxd.net
  • petametrics.com
  • quantserve.com
  • rubiconproject.com
  • adnxs.com
  • netzathleten-media.de
  • openx.net
  • google-analytics.com
  • xpanama.net
  • qualaroo.com
  • adumen.com

I am sorry, but until this issue has been resolved, I will refrain from contributing. This is not against LyricWiki, but Wikia. Yours, Chris 22:31, October 30, 2017 (UTC)

Well, this is not a scheme being used in Canada. No website is tracking me, including the ones you list.
Neither any ant-ad block in effect, all FNADOM ads are blocked on my computer, but they are a pain at AllMusic and suck memory like a black hole if a page is left open with ads for more than a few minutes. --ES (talk) 23:28, October 30, 2017 (UTC)
Yeah this doesn't happen to me when signed in. But try accessing the page while logged off, like our users would. That's when everything goes down, I guess. Sad - Chris 01:12, November 13, 2017 (UTC)
Looks like they removed the anti-blocker code a few weeks ago. (maybe due to the GDPR?) - OneTwoThreeFall talk 08:53, June 18, 2018 (UTC)

What constitutes a "legitimate" release?

Bringing this discussion to AP per Senv's request. I would like to know where in the docs the "legitimacy" of a release is established. I've done work on plenty of independent artists in the past, and nobody seemed to bat an eye. Many such independent artists only have their music on a couple self-released platforms, such as Bandcamp, ReverbNation, etc. Also, with digital music now being more widespread than ever, it doesn't make sense to me how an independent artist such as the one exemplified in this discussion doesn't count as "real". It's still music, regardless of the platform it's released on. Not to mention, the aforementioned platforms have respective footer templates - so why would these exist if the artists on them aren't "legitimate"? I think some things need to be cleared up here, because it seems rather ill-defined to me and I'm really confused about it. XxTimberlakexx (talk) (contribs)00:54, November 8, 2017 (UTC)

It seems you've missed the essential accent of my request: I do not question the general legitimacy, or "reality" of these albums - I just doubt about their legitimacy as LW-object. Let's take a closer look at the entire discography of this artist: it's totally instrumental, with single "exception" - one song contains ...4 words-length spoken refrain: "Wrong side, you idiot!". Let me slightly refrase this "lyrics": I may be wrong, but LW is a "wrong site" for such discography imo. I'm just curious to hear other admins/bureaucrats opinion, --Senvaikis (talk) 12:09, November 8, 2017 (UTC)
This is far from the only primarily-instrumental artist we have on here, though, so that's another thing I'm confused about. Jean Michel Jarre, Kitaro, Miles Davis...the list goes on. If such artists weren't allowed, wouldn't they have been deleted long ago? Also, that is not the only song of his with lyrics. This song has valid lyrics (and quite a lot of them in comparison), which I linked on my talk page, if you saw that. Also, he was featured on this song, which has lyrics as well.
My question is, is there an actual rule against this, or is this just your humble opinion? XxTimberlakexx (talk) (contribs)16:12, November 8, 2017 (UTC)

Myspace

While we're waiting for the other admins to respond to the last header, I wanted to bring this up as it's been something I've been thinking about for some time (maybe it's been talked about before - but if so, it's been a while). Why is it that when creating talk pages for artists, there's a specific parameter for Myspace and Myspace only? Why not Facebook, Twitter, or other social platforms? Sub-question, is a Myspace parameter still needed at all? Even though the site is technically still active, it's pretty dead in this day and age, with other social media sites having majorly taken over. On top of that, I notice most Myspace profiles linked in the ArtistHeader are long dead and haven't been updated in years. Maybe other admins disagree, but I personally think we should phase out the Myspace parameter because it's hardly useful nowadays and most bands don't keep theirs updated, instead primarily using Facebook and Twitter. XxTimberlakexx (talk) (contribs)05:05, November 22, 2017 (UTC)

(1) Ranking templates are rarely updated. Song Info also lacks allmusic and musicbrainz. Trouble is, if we add them, all silver and gold pages that lack them will be downgraded to bronze.
(2) Not sure if it's dead enough yet – see [1] and [2] (just the first links I found on the topic). — 6×9 (Talk) 11:18, November 22, 2017 (UTC)
Agree that ms may be not dead enough yet to be forgotten completely; but is it still alive enough to play a role of mandatory ranking info?
Dead mss: all 1333 dead ms links have been removed.--Senvaikis (talk) 14:12, November 26, 2017 (UTC)
Yeah exactly, using Myspace as one of the mandatory page ranking info for artists seems pretty arbitrary and outdated. I feel like updating that to instead be Facebook or Twitter (or both?) would make more sense.
Thanks for getting rid of the dead Myspaces. When I said "dead", though, I wasn't just referring to Myspaces that no longer exist, but Myspaces that haven't been updated in a very long time and aren't useful anymore. Of course, your bot can't detect those, but I was just clarifying that. XxTimberlakexx (talk) (contribs)04:40, November 28, 2017 (UTC)
Sadly Myspace's music player is dead...what else are they good for? --ES (talk) 03:47, February 28, 2018 (UTC)

Dupe label(s)?

  1. Decca / Decca Records.
  2. RCA / RCA Records

--ES (talk) 16:49, December 16, 2017 (UTC)

You may find more pretenders to your list here. --Senvaikis (talk) 19:16, December 16, 2017 (UTC)

c:Artists with Homepage

Is there a category for this? Can we have one? tia --ES (talk) 16:52, January 4, 2018 (UTC)

done Category:Artists with Homepage6×9 (Talk) 09:22, January 6, 2018 (UTC)
Well Done! --ES (talk) 09:51, January 6, 2018 (UTC)

Dead Special Pages

S:WP and S:WC haven't updated in 2 months... Is this permanent? tia. --ES (talk) 03:45, February 28, 2018 (UTC)

They're back! --ES (talk) 03:47, June 18, 2018 (UTC)
Oh that's good! I guess your recent report prompted them to take a look at the issue! - OneTwoThreeFall talk 08:49, June 18, 2018 (UTC)
Maybe the bug has re-struck with a wider scope. None of the special pages have updated in 3 days. --ES (talk) 00:50, July 26, 2018 (UTC)

Unrecorded: Sheet music / poetry / etc.

What are we to do with pages of unrecorded music? All of the OS items here and some here and at least one other artist page with an entire OS of unrecorded poetry. Template? ideas? tia. --ES (talk) 19:55, March 29, 2018 (UTC)

Fake News

LyricWiki is leaving its mark in other lyrics collecting databases:

I love it Grin - Chris 22:46, April 2, 2018 (UTC)

ExtLink Cat

Can we have categories for pages that use Template:ExtLink. tia --ES (talk) 02:37, April 10, 2018 (UTC)

Not sure why – WLH does the same. — 6×9 (Talk) 17:38, April 10, 2018 (UTC)

Display of album genre on artist page

Would be nice to see album genre on artist page, maybe right under aa text? --ES (talk) 19:02, May 21, 2018 (UTC)

My first reaction: "omg, - one more de-facto unmanageable source of desynchronization between the pages, in addition to the {{cv}} and {{feat}}?". Let's wait for the second one... :)--Senvaikis (talk) 19:57, May 21, 2018 (UTC)
It must be transcluded from album page, otherwise it won't fly. I wasn't expecting manual entry.
  • And re {{cv}}... I think the place for that is on the song pages only, ends up cluttering artist and album pages...--ES (talk) 20:06, May 21, 2018 (UTC)
Don't really see the need or use, major genres are listed in AI anyway. For transcluding you'd need a new template, AA won't do it. — 6×9 (Talk) 11:31, May 22, 2018 (UTC)

Valid std albs with no aa

Please see Ken Reaume. As I understand it we don't have a policy on this matter (there is no page that I can find that describes how to deal with this situation). Albums are valid per external links, but no aa exists (ATM), so release page creation is out of the question, unless we want more pages in c.amca. --ES (talk) 03:07, June 7, 2018 (UTC)

To be strict, unavailable aa doesn't make release page creation "out of the question" per current policy, otherwise all amca members should have been deleted. And though I also have an old dream about the complete cleaning of amca, but I'm afraid that proposed solution rises more problems than solves.
Maybe we should think (once again) about the splitting of current amca into two more strict categories - "albums with unknown album art" (just not uploaded yet) and "albums with unavailable album art" (banned by ToU or impossible to find/upload), with a special standard aa img(s) for the latter?
--Senvaikis (talk) 19:32, June 8, 2018 (UTC)
Where is the policy page on this matter? A link would be sufficient. tia.--ES (talk) 02:46, June 9, 2018 (UTC)
There is no policy that forbids it. Nor is there a policy that says "anything that isn't explicitly allowed is automatically forbidden".
Placeholder: maybe even two different images/categories for ToU / unavailable, so it's clear that one means "may not upload". — 6×9 (Talk) 07:13, June 9, 2018 (UTC)

Example with cheap placeholder image in my sandbox. — 6×9 (Talk) 17:38, June 12, 2018 (UTC)

Noticed already, - thx :). Are you going to make according changes (triggering cats) in {{AlbumHeader}}? --Senvaikis (talk) 19:09, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
done6×9 (Talk) 18:03, June 15, 2018 (UTC)

BandCamp player embedded

Hi all,

in the first place - Bobo and Six, who've actively participated in this discussion about the embedded BCplayer. which, as you remember, ended with nothing - we still have not found any acceptable implementation for BCplayer.
But this fix-idea did not get out of my head, until finally - mea culpa - I still decided on this to my own responsibility: now, in addition to YT/Spot/Songs, all BC/Songs may have embedded BCplayer too. Additional {{Bandcamp}} BCsongID parameter, activating the link to BCplayer ("hidden" under BC logo img), actually left all the former functionality and appearance of the template intact, so ordinary users may even not notice this change - they may only wonder where this 4th digital parameter has came from and what for it has appeared at all.
That's why actually I'm writing this msg - if we decide to legitimize this "guerrilla" approach, then at least some additional explanation in {{Bandcamp}}/Doc would be necessary...
So, waiting for your comments, suggestions etc - tia, --Senvaikis (talk) 07:08, June 20, 2018 (UTC)
Well well, let's explain this strange silence by the summer season...
And yet I want to draw your attention to one more particularity, disclosed in the process of {{Bandcamp}} updating. As you know, Category:Bandcamp/Song is a subcat of Category:Songs With Audio Link. Actually this is not always the case: some BC song pages may contain only descriptional info, without any embedded player. Currently Lwt has found ~480 such BCID-less songs. Samples:
So, all these BcSongID-less songs are members of BC/S, but, strictly speaking, should not be assigned to SWAL. In other words, additional changes in {{Bandcamp}} are required?... --Senvaikis (talk) 15:44, July 4, 2018 (UTC)
I think I was patient enough, waiting for any your reaction here. But some solutions are just necessary for further Lwt job with BC/S, so - blame yourself - good or bad, but I was just forced to make some changes in the {{Bandcamp}} and related cats, without further waiting for any of your answer, objection or advice.
@6: you know, I don't like climbing into your household of curly brackets, but I hope I haven't done any irreparable damage, so you can make all the required final changes later ;)
Short list of changes:
  • a new Category:Bandcamp/Song With Audio, subcat of Category:Bandcamp/Song and Category:Songs With Audio Link, has been created
  • C:BC/S now is not a subcat of C:SWAL
  • all BC/Songs, having an optional 10-digit-length digital 4th parameter, are assigned to the C:BC/SWA, as having a link to embedded BC player
  • if this 4th parameter is set to any non-10-len-digital value (Lwt's choice is "-"), song is considered as BC/Song, knowingly having no audio @ BC (and Lwt will not try to update it)
  • if 4th parameter is not set, song is considered as BC/Song with unknown yet BcSongID (and may be checked/set by Lwt)
  • Sorry, but some at least minimal comments in Template:Bandcamp/doc are still highly desirable...
regards, --Senvaikis (talk) 18:22, July 12, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for long silence… Simplified the code a bit (making link invisible still activates the player) & updated docs. Two things:

  1. Might be time to move audioplayer-js from your userspace to the general namespace, if more people are going to use it.
  2. Since the embedded player is only for song pages it might be a good idea to make that explicit in the code and the template doc (unless I got that wrong). — 6×9 (Talk) 09:09, July 22, 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Agree to both your notes, though I'd prefer to readdress both them: 1st - to 123, 2nd - to 6 :) --Senvaikis (talk) 06:18, July 24, 2018 (UTC)
Instead of adding an extra hidden link, maybe the template could add a data attribute instead (like <div class="plainlinks extlink" data-bandcamp-id="123456789"> )? The AudioPlayer JS could then use something like below to get the needed ID:
var bcLink = document.querySelector(".extlink[data-bandcamp-id]");
if (bcLink) {
    var bcId = bcLink.dataset.bandcampId;
    // add iframe to page
}
Seems like it might be more efficient than searching the body HTML too. - OneTwoThreeFall talk 11:07, July 27, 2018 (UTC)
Updated the doc & added the attribute per your suggestion. Left the invisible link in for now, so both versions work. Is the js only invoked on song pages, or should I add a pagetype check to the template? — 6×9 (Talk) 09:03, July 28, 2018 (UTC)
The js checks if the page is in Category:Bandcamp/Song so probably no need for an extra pagetype check. - OneTwoThreeFall talk 14:25, July 28, 2018 (UTC)
I think that keeping this hidden link does not make much sense now - it's no longer necessary, regardless of whatever decision 123 will take. --Senvaikis (talk) 20:52, July 30, 2018 (UTC)
@6: After the last revision of tl:bc "...this category currently contains no pages or media"... :) --Senvaikis (talk) 10:03, August 1, 2018 (UTC)
PS done seems 2b fixed now, - my apologies for clumsy invasion(s) into your crazy world of curly brackets :)
PPS ...as it should have been expected, the joy was lil' bit hasty... Crazy {world} indeed, - too "curly" for my poor brain :)
Ok, I've copied your JS to MediaWiki:AudioPlayer.js and made a few little tweaks (fixed a security issue + changed Spotify code to not search HTML text), and added it into MediaWiki:CodeLoad-definitions.js. If it looks/works good for you, it can be sent for the review! - OneTwoThreeFall talk 12:17, August 2, 2018 (UTC)
@123: Well Done! Good work, - thanks (for tl:bc' too)! Tested - works perfect (in test mode for a while), so you positively may submit your changes for rewiev; I'll delete the deprecated version from my namespace after their approval.
Now remains only one "trifle" - docs... ;) --Senvaikis (talk) 12:51, August 2, 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! Looks like 6 has updated the template docs, and I've added it to LyricWiki:Scripts, so docs should be good. - OneTwoThreeFall talk 12:59, August 7, 2018 (UTC)

Discogs Tracks

It seems Discogs is implementing a tracks feature. It's currently still in beta, but if this comes to fruition, would it be fitting to implement links for song pages? - Patzilla777 (talk - contributions) 19:32, July 22, 2018 (UTC)

Good news - it would be nice to join all the power of discogs DB data to our tracks info, and I'm sure Six easily could make all required changes in {{Discogs}}; it's just a pitty that any massive changes (using Lwt) are hardly possible yet, while dog API doesn't support neither track nor composition IDs (at least I failed to find any info about that in API documentation).
Let me know if I'm wrong (I'd like to be...), --Senvaikis (talk) 19:47, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

PureVolume

Looks like PV lost touch with our PV artists for good. --ES (talk) 10:12, July 24, 2018 (UTC)

Fake Arabic lyrics

The songs listed here are written in fake Arabic (not romanized). They need real Arabic script lyrics or proper romanized Arabic and the fake versions deleted. tia & الله اکبر. --ES (talk) 12:58, September 5, 2018 (UTC)

Category navigation

Must be Wednesday… Looks like WikiaFandom have added automatic navigation to all categories. (A-Z, and "Other" which is everything after Z.) Doesn't make {{CatAZ}} completely obsolete though. — 6×9 (Talk) 16:38, November 7, 2018 (UTC)

The old ("classic") layout is still available through user prefs – good, because the new "dynamic" layout has subcats and pages clumped together. — 6×9 (Talk) 09:57, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

EchoSierra's admin status

FYI, Senv and I have decided to remove ES's admin status. In case one of you doesn't know our reasons for this step hard to imagine, just read the second-to-last topic on his talk page and remember that this is just the latest of many, many, many similar instances. — 6×9 (Talk) 15:54, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

I don't know how I missed this (although I admit I haven't been following too closely), but I'd like to say I agree with this move, as ES often seemed a wall new users ran into whenever they needed help. - Patzilla777 (talk - contributions) 15:22, December 12, 2018 (UTC)
I only just found out about this today myself - been very busy these days and have been focusing on site work more than the admin portal. I also wanted to add that I think this was probably for the best. ES hasn't had this attitude toward me personally, but I feel like I would always see users complaining about his tone for years and years, to the point where one user even left due to the drama. It's all made me a bit uncomfortable since it was no behavior for a site admin (who are supposed to be respectful, kind and helpful). XxTimberlakexx (talk) (contribs)19:41, February 8, 2019 (UTC)

Lyric deletions

…have come up again, see CP. Interestingly, all deletions have been done by a single staff member (see here), so it would be interesting to get some opinions from her colleagues… Anyone volunteering to contact them? It always takes me hours trying to put it into the right words, and this close to Christmas I'd rather use that time elsewhere :-) — 6×9 (Talk) 10:06, December 19, 2018 (UTC)

Community content is available under Copyright unless otherwise noted.