2,054,077 Pages

Formatting of compilations with ex-members or bands

Have a couple of questions concerning such compilated albums as Bryan Ferry:The Platinum Collection (2004) or The Beautiful South:Soup (2007), when album is being released by one artist/band (Bryan Ferry, The Beautiful South), but part of songs in compilation is recorded by his ex-band, often disbanded already at the moment of compilation release (Roxy Music, The Housemartins). Am I right treating such albums as not 'Various Artist' compilation, because there is one artist or band, joining all compilation (Bryan Ferry and The Beatiful South in our case)?

If so, how then should be formatted such albums? I've tried to use 'mixed' approach - naming such album as belonging to one artist/band (format, based on {{Album}}, but including ex-band name as an artist name in song list (as in {{VariousArtistsAlbum}} (see Bryan Ferry:The Platinum Collection (2004)). That seemed good until I checked such approach using search f-n getArtist(). All songs, formatted that way, where displayed with additional artist name, separated by ":" in a wiki-style. Truth to tell I don't know is it good or bad :).

Sure I'm not the first who's trying to solve such problem, so this time I do hope to pick up some help ;) First of all my hopes assotiates with you, formatting guru Kiefer, the more especially as you've formatted at least one compilation I'm talking about, Roxy Music:Street Life 20 Great Hits (1989). ...Or may be Bryan Ferry:Street Life 20 Great Hits (1989)?

Tia, --Senvaikis (talk) 06:45, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I would have done that page exactly the same! If an artist re-records a song by their former band, then [[I would use the artist's name, as it is a different recorded version, and possibly have a Cover template note at the top of the new page. If the compilation (as I'm guessing here) is including the artist's former group/band, then linking to the original page with a notation after the link that it's by that former group/band is perfect.
As for "Street Life 20 Great Hits", that is quite an interesting situation! Both Bryan Ferry and Roxy Music are on the cover as artists for the album! I think that in this instance, the album should be treated as a compilation album by multiple artists (even though there are only 2), at Bryan Ferry - Roxy Music: Street Life - 20 Great Hits (1989). (The sites that I looked at appeared to place a - where the star-like bullets are.) Then, Bryan Ferry:Street Life - 20 Great Hits (1989), Bryan Ferry:Street Life 20 Great Hits (1989), Roxy Music:Street Life - 20 Great Hits (1989), and Roxy Music:Street Life 20 Great Hits (1989) should all redirect to that page. The compilation can be placed on the Bryan Ferry page, as well. You may want to add a note that songs are by Roxy Music unless otherwise noted, or put a notation after each Roxy Music song as you did with the Bryan Ferry ones. If you want/need help with all that, feel free to let me know.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   10:41, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
I just noticed that the Platinum Collection also lists both artists, as well.... Compilation album as well?    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   10:43, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
Yes, it would be nice (to point that album belongs to both artists/bands), but doesn't that mean we are creating the new instance of artist Bryan Ferry - Roxy Music? That would be fair to midling if not one niuance - Bryan Ferry was a member of Roxy Music, and he just can't appear here twice, so such construction is a little bit irrational. Yes, such discography-oriented services as Allmusic or Discogs points to both artists as an author of album, but with one (essential) difference - pointing to both artists doesn't create a new instance of artist there. Look for example how Discogs displays info about album "Bryan Ferry / Roxy Music - Street Life: 20 Great Hits", and you'll notice, that Discogs preserves separate links for each artist/band. I'd like to comply such rules, but seems to me it's not possible in lw... Then I'd prefere another approach - father such albums to that artist/band who released this album (Bryan Ferry and The Beautiful South in my case), pointing who recorded particular song only as comment.
Is such point of view acceptable? --Senvaikis (talk) 11:51, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
Don't think of the "Bryan Ferry - Roxy Music" as an artist, but merely part of the album title "Bryan Ferry - Roxy Music: Street Life - 20 Great Hits (1989)". (Or "Bryan Ferry/Roxy Music: Street Life: 20 Great Hits (1989)", if you wish.) Soundtracks don't have an artist assigned to the album, either, such as The Matrix: Music From The Motion Picture (1999). The page is known to be an album, however, due to the release date at the end. The album is also "marked" as not being by the artist "Bryan Ferry - Roxy Music" by the space after the colon.
Now, one could create an artist page for "Bryan Ferry/Roxy Music" if one wished to also list those compilations there. Might be a bit over-the-top, as there aren't any songs by "Bryan Ferry/Roxy Music", only greatest hits compilations, but it wouldn't be a bad thing, just a bit redundant.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   12:27, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
I've never thought that way ( - I'm just talking about the fact that when you open such page (Bryan Ferry - Roxy Music: Street Life - 20 Great Hits (1989)), on the top of it you'll find the string: 'by Bryan Ferry - Roxy Music', e.g. link to artist page your good selves admitted being redundant. And no link to real artist/band...--Senvaikis (talk) 12:49, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
Sorry, didn't noticed your last note about space after colon - it changes situation slightly, but I haven't heard about that earlier. Is that documented somewhere? Then I've missed it... But agree, Discogs approach would be more palatable...:). Thanks, --Senvaikis (talk) 13:02, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, the auto-template for the new page will add the assumed info into the Album template (it makes the assumption that the page isn't a compilation/soundtrack because most albums aren't), but the Album template should be changed to the "VariousArtistAlbum" template as shown on Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Compilations, anyhow.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   13:56, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
Placed link to Roxy Music:Street Life 20 Great Hits (1989) in Bryan Ferry page according your suggestions. Two notes about that album:
  • It should be moved to Roxy Music:Street Life 20 Great Hits (1986) (First release - in 1986)
  • Looked for all available to me sources (AllMusic, Discogs, Wiki, Google, Cover-paradies etc.), but haven't find the cover art with both Bryan & RM photo on it - all sources provide the same image (added to album page).
Regards, --Senvaikis (talk) 04:50, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
Made test page for compilation Bryan Ferry And Roxy Music:More Than This - The Best Of Bryan Ferry + Roxy Music (1995). It would be nice if KingNee included support for multiple releases in his cool AlbumFooter template. I tried to realize that manually for illustration how it may look. I was using template MusicBrainzRelease for that by now, but it looks slightly clumsy, especially for multireleases.--Senvaikis (talk) 15:39, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
Things look really good. Excellent work!    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   21:19, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Thought you deserved this...

Multi-Platinum Record The Multi-Platinum Record
Senvaikis, I hereby present you with this Multi-Platinum Record for your excellent contributions! Keep up the great work!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 19:25, 4 July 2008 (EDT)
Truth to tell, don't know what does that mean, but have some feeling that should be something good ;) Thanks, Redxx!--Senvaikis (talk) 08:53, 5 July 2008 (EDT)

I totally agree...

I always used to insert info up the top too (seems logical to me), but I have had to move some of the additional song info you have been inserting on Bowie to bottom of song pages. See this Additional Song Information. Btw I can see the end is in sight of that damn Other Songs list (hee hee) Keep up the good work!! ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 06:54, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

First of all - nice to see we have some kinship in our musical tastes :).
About the light you see in the end of tunnel: I'm afraid that's the lights of train comming ;) - most of posittions in this remaining OS part are hardly unsplittable garbage (btw, - typical product of bot job, collecting all possible garbage from over the world...). Thanks for info, good luck melting OS,--Senvaikis (talk) 07:20, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
Meet the train, Redxx! (I'm taking the break - summer...;)) --Senvaikis (talk) 08:17, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
Enjoy! ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 18:40, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

You've got a friend in me

As an admin, let me say that I am here for you. Any time you see a page that needs changing that you can't touch, shoot me a note and I'll jump all over it, or unlock it for you. I don't know anything about the API, so you'll have to send those questions elsewhere, but anything else I'm here for you. As far as documentation goes, if you see that something is not inline with practice, please feel free to change it. However, if you want to change practice, that should be discussed. Feel free to give me homework! --Åqúàŧĩkī - É - Ŧ 01:06, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks, Aq. Glad you haven't got into a miff some my notes - that's an attribute of real proffesional, so I'm certain to exploit this nice your feature ;)
See you soon, your friend --Senvaikis (talk) 05:14, 21 July 2008 (EDT)


I wanted to point out that I noticed you had lrc pages up and running, and I wanted to say that I thought it looked good. Thanks for the addition!
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:41, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

I do want to ask though: would it be inappropriate to put a song footer on an lrc page? possibly an lrc footer? That way we could do all the sorting, and make categories unique for lrc pages, and footers unique to lrc pages...
First of all thanks for noticing that experiment (some kind of stuff Aq was talking about -"just doing instead of talking" ;))
But to be honest, I'm not sure that it's the best solution for TL in LW (hope you've read some my discussions about that). More over - I even wasn't sure if it's legal (again - not documented suitably, so inittially I thought that templates are only for admins...) Anyway, I absolutelly agree with you - if such approach would be accepted, then some standard format for TL subpages must be approved. And imo both header and footer should be different from ones of song pages for reasons you've mentioned and for some additional, TL-specific reasons. How they should look - it's a matter of discussions, I think. As an example for one of possible parameters in such subpage footer I can mention once more link to []. Knowing your outstanding contribution in this field I hope you may say your solid word here too :)
BTW, ~5000 TL's are waiting for some final solution :) I have made alredy a little app for uploading them, but just thought it would be better to wait for some conventional solution.
Regards, --Senvaikis (talk) 05:01, 21 July 2008 (EDT)
Just one point for possible discussion: {{LrcWiki}} may be replaced by just one additional (optional) parameter to {{SongFooter}}. In more complicated version this footer can have link either to local song TL subpage or to external source, such as above mentioned
One thing disturbs my mind speaking about TL - there are a lot of artists (especially - bluesmans), which songs have different TL allmost in every album. That leads to several possible TL's for one particular (in terms of LW) song.--Senvaikis (talk) 06:40, 21 July 2008 (EDT)
Ok, I don't know all of your expectations for timed lyrics. I'm going to do my best.
What we have right now is the question of whether we do something in house, or we outsource to those who do it better, and have been doing it longer. It would be very easy for us to put in the song footer a link. That doesn't allow for multiple timings. Wheat you could do is keep the link external, and use a template below the song footer (It's what we do with MusicBrainzRelease). That allows for multiple different timed lyrics links.
TL in house makes me nervous. In the shuffle of things, I don't want things getting lost and misplaced. Doesn't mean we can't do it.
You say this might not be the best solution, what do you think is?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 13:30, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

I was just waiting who'll be the first to say that :) Truth to tell, I never liked the idea about wiki-style TL subpages, starting from my very first discussion with Tec about that. That's why I do understand your nervousness; You'll become even more nervous, when you try to simulate all complicated situations relative to all possible TL variants for a single LW song and all possible needless reedits of such pages. And who can be the judge to say what edition is 'correct'? I thought (and so do now) that more appropriate (easier, lighter and not disturbing the main LW content) approach would be just adding a link in a song page to uneditable uploadable lrc file. But for some reasons this way is closed for us - lrc uploading was stopped. I tried to explore the reasons of such 'doors shutting'. As you know - unsuccesfully. I know who can answer this question, but i'll never ask him about that again - this question is too unimportant not only for him, but for me too :) I'll better patiently wait for an answer to my Main Unanswered Question ;)

To be more serious, here is my (pardon, King's too:)) suggestion:

let's make additional parameter to songfooter, named, say, |LrcdbID. If someone passes here song ID from, footer'll contain link to TL on this site with some default link text. So, songfooter with parameter |LrcDB = 14594 would produce string Timed lyrics on lrcDB. That would be suitable for most simple (unique) cases.

If song has more then one TL, then we can use some simplest template of type {{LrcDB|14594|Robert Cray-I'm Walking (Twenty)}}, producing the link like Robert Cray-I'm Walking (Twenty).

pros and cons

Let's start from the end:

  1. You must post TL to lrcDb before linking in LW, if lrcDB doesn't contain your TL
    • (posting to lrcdb requires signed account)
  2. Nobody (me too) knows how long lrcDb will be alive
  1. Almost nothing to do in LW
  2. Any interferences/mismatches/conflicts with the main LW content
  3. Extremely simple formatting policy
  4. All are happy:
    • King is happy
      1. not nervous
      2. it's his suggestion
      3. see p. 1
    • Sen is happy
      1. see p. 1
      2. it's his suggestion too;)
      3. lrcDB is full of his lrc's ;)
    • Tec is happy
      1. no need to remember promise to reanimate lrc upload
      2. see p.1
    • ...
  5. And finally - truth to tell, LW never was designed as site for TL, so it would be little wrong ideologically and philosophically to keep TL in LW internally.

You decide:), --Senvaikis (talk) 15:45, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

Ok, so no internal TL's. The idea I had was similar to {{Artist}}'s download link. It is just a full url, so any LRC from any website is fair game. Does that work?
BTW, this is your baby, you decide :D
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 00:13, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
Yep...:) Ok, if that's the end of discussion, let it be so (but - reflected in LW rules).
Blessing in disguise - good example for Aq what is worth "just doing":)--Senvaikis (talk) 02:10, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
I will add TL to the song footer in the next couple of days. I'll let you know what I nail out for that one. It will probably be |timedLyrics = http://www.timedlyrics/LRCID by the end of things.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 02:59, 22 July 2008 (EDT)


Just Demo, --Senvaikis (talk) 05:36, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

Looks good Sven  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 15:37, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
  • I did go with a separate template from the SongFooter. By putting it in the song footer, we would have lost the ability to do multiple timings/versions.
  • This one is {{TimedLyrics}}, and it is a little different from {{LrcDB}}. TL takes a full URL, so we can go anywhere with that.
  • A title is optional.
Check this out:

|artist = Led Zepplin
|song = Stairway to Heaven
|fLetter = S
{{TimedLyrics|link=|title="Led Zeppelin IV" version}}

Makes: (nowikied to exclude talk page from Songs category, --Senvaikis (talk) 05:36, 10 September 2008 (EDT))

|artist = Led Zepplin
|song = Stairway to Heaven
|fLetter = S
{{TimedLyrics|link=|title="Led Zeppelin IV" version}}

Is that something that you can sink your teeth into?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 00:06, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Thanks, Kingnee, - that's ok, looks good and is more universal, open for using with any external link. I just wanted to ask - what is preferred practice of templates creating and using? Let's take for example these two templates: LrcDB and TimedLyrics. Both are maden for the same task, and second overlaps the first one. But LrcDB is shorter and more convenient for such users as me, pretending to link only to Is it acceptable to keep/use both of them?--Senvaikis (talk) 08:53, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
And the last question: is it costly (slowing down etc.) to add one more optional parameter to songfooter, which wouldn't produce any output being empty? I can explain why I'm asking about that. Footer contains allready information about song and artist. Then providing only one simple parameter |lid we could have more informative, other links-like link to TL site: Nina SimoneAin't Got No, I Got Life</span
regards, --Senvaikis (talk) 10:05, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
It would not be an issue to add another optional parameter. But I would like to not, because of the multiple timings thing. If we did both, things would get confusing.
This is not a hard and fast rule, but there should be one way to do the same thing.
If were, in your opinion, the place to go for TL's, then I'd go with {{LrcDB}} as our way of doing TL on LW. Otherwise, we could have 10 different site specific templates that all do the same thing, essentially.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 14:08, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Just for curiosity - look at this and say your oppinion :)--Senvaikis (talk) 14:24, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
It could be made standard. It looks good, in fact. I'll add it at some point. I'll go ahead and delete the {{TimedLyrics}} template to avoid confusion, and keep {{LrcDB}} in case of multiple timings.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 15:29, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Thanks, King, --Senvaikis (talk) 16:32, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
If you haven't some other indications for {{TimedLyrics}} deletion, I'd suggest to leave it as an opportunity for linking to other lrc sources.--Senvaikis (talk) 04:38, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I've been pondering the idea of adding LrcDB to the songfooter as an optional parameter. I have come to the conclusion that this should not be. We already have {{LrcDB}}, which does the job. I came to this for 2 reasons. Multiple timings, and multiple templates. SongFooter could not support multiple timings, in which you would have to use LrcDB anyway. Also, the first time user (which we do need to be able to accommodate) would find multiple templates being used to do the same thing.
So for now, just use LrcDB below the SongFooter.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 15:42, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Following your logic you must remove MBID parameter from {{AlbumFooter}} as well. A lot of albums have multiple re-releases (and often - with bonus tracks on them) with their own MBID. In such cases we (at least I) just omit MBID value in footer and use {{MusicBrainzRelease}}, specially left for such multiple releases. Just MBID as a part of footer is more convenient for unique releases - that's why we have them both. So where's the difference with TL? --Senvaikis (talk) 16:29, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Several reasons. Mainly, AlbumFooter is different from SongFooter. There is a lot more to work with in SongFooter. Also: MusicBrainz could potentially work for 90% of the releases here, where LrcDB...not as large a database (don't get me wrong, it is quite extensive). That is why I originally pushed for the universality of TimedLyrics.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 17:25, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Admitted --Senvaikis (talk) 03:21, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

Don't you think that now, then internal lrc is illegitimate, category "Songs with timed lyrics" should be reconsidered? In other words - should I leave adding this category to song in {{LrcDB}}?--Senvaikis (talk) 13:43, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
You should keep that. You may want to modify it slightly, say Category:LrcDB or somesuch, to differentiate {{LrcDB}} from our previous methods/efforts.
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 15:02, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

I'd prefere to leave such modifications for you, admins, with your permission; thanks, --Senvaikis (talk) 15:09, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

Timed Lyrics..

Foo Fighters:Times Like These K I was thinking it would be nice to have link for timed lyrics to this song, as it's a *Gold* :-) These are (almost) right lyrics (ours are 99.99999% correct) (lol). Only problem is you will note that on lrcdb these are listed as "non-album track". Whereas the incorrect version (which you will note is not over 4 minutes but is only 2 minutes long) is listed as being the song from this album!! I'll leave that with you to mull over...  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 06:32, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

The only one solution in such case is very simple: find another, correct lrc source or just post one to lrcDB. I'd be glad to do it for you, but unfortunately haven't this song. If you remember my old "business expansion scheme", it's still in force: give me a link to your mp3 file, and I'll make lrc for it. More over - I'll even post it to lrcDB for free :)--Senvaikis (talk) 07:12, 30 July 2008 (EDT)
Communication with Aq spoils - I became habituated to much faster reaction...;)--Senvaikis (talk) 09:04, 30 July 2008 (EDT)
Hee hee thank you Senv (or is it Vincas? lol) I knew I could rely on you to do a good job! I think I've got this album on disc, so I checked lyrics by listening to track on GoEar. However, if you still want track let me know and I will upload it for you to 4Shared. But those lyrics will do very nicely. Thanks again. :-) ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:01, 30 July 2008 (EDT)
Thanks Red, - as you could understand, I've got already album you was speaking about (otherwise how could I make tl? ;)). But now I have very similar problem, trying to turn Young Bob 'silver' :). So, I'd be much obliged to you, if you could find & share album Showdown! - just can't find it to make TL for it. BTW, can you please take a look here too - may be you can give me your (as usual) wise advice? :) Tia, on behalf of Vincas - --Senvaikis (talk) 08:12, 31 July 2008 (EDT)
It's in the post ;). Also hope this helps. And I couldn't quite understand whether you have got that exact version of Times Like These (i.e. the one off One by One) or not, so just for you...Times Like These ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 12:07, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

I'm starting suspect that you have not checked lrc I've made for this song, otherwice you'd saw that this lrc exactly corresponds to Times Like These timing. That's possible only having exactly the same song :). Anyway - thanks :). Ok, now again my turn to uncover my own dullness: must to confess - haven't got the meaning of the first sentence in your last post, - sorry :). Have you read my reply to your reply @Kief? What do you think?--Senvaikis (talk) 15:41, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, only now have noticed your comment at 4shared. Again feeling myself slow - where do you see a word "but" in this lrc? Or you wanted to say that this word must be there? Truth to tell, I don't hear it. Keeping in mind my age, that's possible... But I still can read fair to midling, and haven't found this word in your gold lyrics page too... I'm in confusion :)--Senvaikis (talk) 16:28, 31 July 2008 (EDT)
Yep... I've got to feel a real detective, but now I know at least what a word "But" you are speaking about. I found your revision, removing this word from the lyrics. But the question remains - what is wrong with the lrc, which was 100% based on the last your edition of lyrics?--Senvaikis (talk) 17:06, 31 July 2008 (EDT)
I wish you was British at times Senv ;) (or I could speak your native tongue) Ok, firstly to explain re song Times Like These. Yes, I had of course seen and read the lyrics and yes I know it matches exactly, however I thought when I looked initially that the album name you had attached to it was Skin And Bones (I thought you might have had to do it like that because there is already a song on there purporting to be from One By One) Anyway seems I was wrong. Also: "I'd be glad to do it for you, but unfortunately haven't this song." Anyway enough of that. You got it that's all that matters and I thank you again for your kind efforts in creating timed lyrics.
With regards to the "but" word. I'm really glad you can't hear it, cos that was exactly what I wanted you to do! To listen to song and check this out for me. Because after I had made the song gold and you created a 100% correct lrc for it, an anonymous user came here and changed the 100% perfect gold ranked Redxx seal of approval lyrics by inserting a "but" and I sure as hell can't hear no "but" either  !!! Btw..very clever detective work!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 19:14, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Yep, may be I'd understood your joke with "but" if I were British, (more due to specific type of sense of humor, not language skills) ;) --Senvaikis (talk) 12:12, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Your User Page has won an award for being included in the most categories ever!!

I give up! I have kept noticing that your user sub page User:Senvaikis/SF is included in nearly every category that exists because you have a copy of the Song Template on it. So today I thought I would try to correct this by inserting a </noinclude> at the end. I thought that would definately fix the problem...but alas :( it didn't. And since I am of course not quite as clever as you, as you know, with html code...could I ask you to fix it for me please? Thank you :-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 06:30, 27 August 2008 (EDT)

Being not so clever as you declare, may I ask you if deletion of this test subpage would solve the problem? I even can't remember what for it was made (and forgotten), sorry. Anyway, thus far I'm marking it for deletion. Thanks, --Senvaikis (talk) 08:46, 27 August 2008 (EDT)
Thanks Senv, I have deleted it now :-)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 09:20, 27 August 2008 (EDT)


Hi Senv!
Long time no speak..
Just wanted to say thanks very much for your kind assistance with languages. I was also wondering if you was doing these all manually, or using some sort of script. The reason I ask is because I'm currently loking into the best way to resolve this problem and you seem to be getting through them very quickly :-)
I hope you are well.
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 21:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Red,
thanks, I'm fine :) As you possibly know, I'm a strong WS adherent, so far having no luck trying to animate LW SOAP WS. So I made a little .NET-util, using WS where it's possible for updating some LW album or song info (album, asin, MB, iTunes, lrc, language etc.) - something intermediate between manual and automatical updating. It arguably can't be so efficient as your bots, but at least it releases me from stultifying typing, mixed with copy/paste. BTW, my util is almost helpless working with pages, mistreated by LW API (yes, I know it's better to keep silence about that... Regards, --Senvaikis (talk) 07:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
While working with languages, Category:Songs Needing Language Identification should be very useful, if it... showed real situation. Check for example list for Deep Purple - all DP songs, listed here, have language parameter being set. May be you know some way to refresh this list to correspond real situation (I suspect it's cached now). thx, --Senvaikis (talk) 09:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I was actually working from a different and more accurate list >> Category:Language/ and was horrified when I looked at the page you referred to - over 500,000 songs without languages!! But then, as you rightly say, for some very strange reason that category also includes many songs with languages (like the Deep Purple ones). I really don't know why songs with languages are being included in a category "Songs Needing Language Identification" Indeed it doesn't make sense. I would guess therefor that it's a category error. Thanks for pointing this out Senv. I'll look into it!  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 17:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
That Util is great! Thanks for buttoning up one of my favorite bands, Modest Mouse. How does it work?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 18:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Lol - it was Senv tackling language parameter on Modest Mouse that actually bought me to his page. With regards to the aforementioned problem, I have done a bit of investigating and I think I may have traced the root of the problem. I didn't want to spoil Senv's page (hee hee), so I have left the details on your talk page about this. However, if I'm wrong...well I just don't know.
 ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 20:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, King, and thanks for kind words about my LwUtil, though it's far from being perfect. I don't know how deep you want me to go into technical details, telling how it works, so here is the draft scheme:

  • Chosing LW object for updating (ususaly by-artist)
    • LW API f-n getArtist is commonly used to select all artist albums/songs (though in some cases I'm forced to 'scratch' info directly from artist pages/subpages)
    • artist, album or track node selection from given XML data depending on editing nature
  • Searching and collecting all required info about object in Inet, using available WS'es or Http requests:
  • Selecting list of objects for updating (usualy - tracks) and update otions (auto/request/overwrite etc.)
  • Cycle of updating selected parameters for selected objects:
    • loading page of selected object in edit mode into internal (hidden) web browser control
      • parsing loaded page & finding required parameters (or detecting their absence), using regex
      • making required updates according chosen update options
      • making according remarks in edit page summary field
      • Updating page (calling button "Save page" click event)
  • End of cycle

Phhh... I'm surprised - it shouldn't be so complicated ;)
Truth to tell this app seems more complicated in description than in action. And it could be simplicity itself, if LW had it's own WS for such tasks - but that's an object of separate discussion.
As I've mentioned allready, all this mess is packed in one .NET application. I don't know if you are familiar with .NET, but anyway - if you have any questions, feel free to ask me for details.
Regards, --Senvaikis (talk) 20:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

From what I see, it seems very elegant. I like it. I would actually go so far to say that it has advantages over bot editing, simply by filling that gap between something that a bot can do and something a human can do (which has always been my personal favorite place to be). However, I do recognize that you have issues with the state of our API. It is hard for me to say anything about the API, since I know so little about how it actually works. Honestly, I've never gotten that much use out of the site's API, aside from looking up lyrics on my phone (with the layout of the page, the full version is impossible to read on a mobile screen [but I digress]).
What I would like to find out is if this utility would be something that a regular user (ex: me) could use and be able to run?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 21:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I think in my head I've completely run off with this LwUtil concept. One of the things that I thought of was the fact that the page ranking stuff could probably be rolled into this, so, for example, when asin is added that spot is checked off.

Sorry for long delay - was inspecting the design and code of my program trying to evaluate possibilities of making it public distribution ready. Sadly, answer is negative. Don't get me wrong - I'd be glad to share it, if it was possible without complete rewriting. Too many holes in "fool-proffing", to many bottle-necks, known only for the the author, - all that make this util even dangerous in hands of casual user. Most of those bottle-necks are determined by compulsory using of page parsing technology, which is, strictly speaking, innacurate. I'd be forced to completelly rewrite this util trying to make it safe enough to be suitable for public distribution. And even then I'd not guarantee 100% safety for LW content; consequently - I'd be responsible for all possible destruction maden by someone using this util. Another cup of tea - if we speak about code sharing with particular user, familliar with .NET and able to adjust this code to his needs, naturally taking all responsibility for using it. All requirements for that - windows box with .NET Framework 2.0 installed and account (AWSAccessKeyId) in Amazon (free, 1 min visit to their site). So if someone (with at least one admin recomendation) is ready to try it "as is" - you are welcome. But truth to tell I'd better wait for full WS-based solution (it would be so easy to write & so handy and safe to use...) For a while you may find some screenshots here. Ok, it's too late, I'm going to bed, see you later, --Senvaikis (talk) 21:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, so giving this one to the casual user might void the warranty. I suppose that that reason exactly is why some things such as Special:BatchMove are admin only, as well as bots and such. However, I still am interested in taking responsibility for myself, and trying it out. Simply put: this tool seems at least at first like one of the more powerful tools that I could find for what I generally find myself doing on the site.
Is it in your interest to make more versions of this? Could suggestions be made?
King_Nee1114 (talk pagecontributionsdeletions) 04:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under Copyright unless otherwise noted.