2,054,160 Pages

Odair José

Hi. If you can, please send the lyrics to artist Odair José, I added a lot of studio albums that he released. Thanks. Songsbr (talk) 11:40, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

done. Sorry, but remarkable part of albums in this page still remains lyricless - I failed to find required lyrics on Inet. Hope you don't expect me to transcribe them while listening all this giant discography... ;).
As you positively know, I hate red-links on our pages, especially when entire albums don't contain any blue-link. Usually I refuse to create album page, having no single blue-link on it. So, if you know any public source, containing missing lyrics - please, let me (Lwt) know about it. Otherwise I'd appeal you to remove empty albs from this artist page. You will be able to readd them from page edit history, if lyrics become available later.
cheers, --Senvaikis (talk) 12:38, October 2, 2014 (UTC)
Don't worry, I only asked you because with Lwt it's easier to add lyrics, you don't need to transcribe lol! I think all lyrics available on the internet Lwt added (i'm saying that based in the brazilian lyrics site). Gimme some time and I will transcribe at least one song of each album with red links. Thank you for the great help! Songsbr (talk) 12:55, October 2, 2014 (UTC)
Well Done!--Senvaikis (talk) 13:02, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

Batchmove is still working?

As in the title. I want to add "The" prefix in Murder City Devils, but I don't know that it's still working. And if it, I need to manually move content from ex. Murder City Devils:18 Wheels to The Murder City Devils:18 Wheels or it will be done automatically? Ozpl18 (talk) 12:30, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

done. AAs titles on artist page should be fixed now (or let me know, if you want me to reupload retitled aas...)
cheers, --Senvaikis (talk) 12:42, October 7, 2014 (UTC)
That is great now, but did you used BM or your bot? :) Ozpl18 (talk) 12:45, October 7, 2014 (UTC)
The latter :).
Btw, you may want to reduce the "weight" of your user-page - it takes ages for loading due to unnecessary overuse of templates & expressions. Moreover - user pages actually aren't dedicated for such "data" collections - you may better use the system of subpages in your SandBox instead.--Senvaikis (talk) 12:59, October 7, 2014 (UTC)
I was about to, but I was focused on just creating it, that I totally forgot. :P I'll look on template creating stuff, maybe I can do it more efficient and weightless. :) Ozpl18 (talk) 13:18, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

Same name different artists

Hi Senvaikis, I just bumped on a problem for which I ask your advice/help. Some time ago I entered some songs of a Dutch group called 'Babe'. Today I wanted to edit some of their songs (for instance I can edit that with no problem, but the link to their group name directs to another band called Babe (from Serbia).

Obviously such problems happen more often. How does one solve that?

Thanks! --Markcoutinho (talk) 06:17, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Take a look at this edition and tell me, if that's what you wanted to ask me about :)--Senvaikis (talk) 06:32, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
Yes, that's exactly what I meant. Shall I edit all the Dutch Babe songs, so their group name refers to its own page?
--Markcoutinho (talk) 07:07, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, you should.
  • Take a look at these notes for additional info about some particularities of work with disambiguated artists and their albs/songs/images
  • try to be more careful and don't overwrite previous messages while posting your answers :)
gl, --Senvaikis (talk) 07:44, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
Once more take a look at above msg.#2 to understand my revisions on Babe! and its coverart pages. --Senvaikis (talk) 13:32, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
I THINK I understand what you mean (the artist aliases in the albums were missing). I changed that and hope that it's all correct now. Thanks for your help, input and patience! :-)

--Markcoutinho (talk) 19:51, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

 :) Yep... Your reference to my patience sounds little sarcastically after your third overwriting of other user messages in my talk page. Luckily, my patience is really well hardened. Anyways, once more: be more careful, please :) --Senvaikis (talk) 20:12, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Song names containing question marks in the middle

Hi Senv, I tried to create Farin Urlaub Racing Team:Herz? Verloren, but as the song contains a question mark in the middle of the song name, I get redirected to Farin Urlaub Racing Team:Herz. For now I created Farin Urlaub Racing Team:Herz Verloren without the question mark, but now the song with the correct name isn't found throught the API. What's the solution to the problem? Greetings, --Fassbrause (talk) 13:53, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

That's not easy to find a solution for a problem, if it... doesn't esist (or doesn't occur for all users). The problem is that I couldn't detect any problem while creatingdone page with original title (question mark isn't forbidden char in lw:pn) and therefore can't explain what caused the fail of your attempt... :)
cheers, --Senvaikis (talk) 14:20, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
Did you by chance try to get to the page by entering the title in your browser's address bar? That won't work for technical reasons. You either have to replace the ? with "%3F" or (preferable) just create a wikilink and follow that. — 6×9 (Talk) 14:43, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
That was actually the silly problem, I tried to enter it in the address bar directly. Thank you both very much for the quick help! - --Fassbrause (talk) 15:06, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
Lol, - thanks 6, now even I understand where was the problem. Btw, you could add one more workaround - just use page renaming form (method, unintentionally used by me). :) --Senvaikis (talk) 15:04, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Trying to find more pages to fix

Hello, it's me! I wanted to ask you a curious question, and I hope it's not a lot of trouble. Are there any other pages on this site that have not been categorized under "Low", "Moderate", or "Severe"? I'm almost done with the split categories and I'm trying to find some more pages that haven't been cleaned up. If not, that's okay. Thanks! --Dr. Beat (talk) 17:19, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I was silently following your titanic job, - just incredible you are really finishing it, - thanks & congrats. But you are right, suspecting that actual split membership may be remarkably larger - not all artists have been categorized (seems to me I used to see such artist pages). I'll look what may be done here, but for a while just have no any bright idea how that may be done, so can't promise it will be done very soon - should think a little...
nite, --Senvaikis (talk) 20:48, October 10, 2014 (UTC)
Well, finally some starting point for your further job is ready done. As it was expected, only a small part of artists was touched by split-categorizing. Now, when Lwt is ready to select artists by OS.count, in principle we may make this categorizing total. But do we want that? I'd like to hear other admins opinion - should we do that or not; and if yes - then what thresholds should be used for new, total {{Split}}. Personally I'd not welcome too low starting boundary...
Good luck continuing your Herculean job, Dr.! :) --Senvaikis (talk) 14:30, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
I'd answer your first question with a "yes" (with possible exception of pages with very few OS).
As for thresholds, I agree that the current numbers (17/67) seem rather low; but I also wonder whether a "dynamic" threshold (percentage of total number of blue songs) might not be preferable… Or am I just overcomplicating things (as usual)?
While we're on the topic, is the talk page really the best place for this template? We could put it on the artist page itself, instead of the OS header (just make it smaller & less obtrusive first). Advantages: a) more noticeable, with the current setup most users don't even know we have something like that; b) it's clearer why that section is there (plus we could add a link to the doc). Disadvantage (besides potential ugliness): someone would have to update Janitor… Thoughts? I'm kinda undecided myself…6×9 (Talk) 08:13, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
@6:Agree with all your notes, especially the last one. I never liked the idea of {{Split}} dislocation on talk page. Regarding your "inclination to overcomplicate things": I'd complicated your dynamic criterium even further, making it dependant from ratio to all (blue+red) songs number... :) --Senvaikis (talk) 08:51, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
(Leaving thresholds aside for now…) How's this look? Minimum wasted space & avoided text wall by linking to doc. Only thing I dislike is 2x "this section". — 6×9 (Talk) 14:51, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
In my humble opinion - it looks awesome. :) Image in last section is cut a little bit, I don't know that's my fault, but look great anyway. Sharp edges on images could be done better, but that's irrelevant. It connect good look with utility... Ozpl (talk) 15:07, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the feedback! Cut in last section shouldn't happen on artist pages; if it does, it just needs a {{clear}} (test page updated now). I noticed aliasing of rounded edges as well; the images were done by LWChris who's usually more careful about these things ;-) Maybe he still has the originals and can redo them… On the other hand, ugly icons give more incentive to clear out OS sections! :-) — 6×9 (Talk) 15:43, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
It does look nice! To get rid of second "this section", perhaps something like "The songs listed below should be split into albums. Please remove this section once this has been done."? - OneTwoThreeFall talk 15:52, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
Good idea! Changed text (and downsized icon – Senv is right, plus it makes aliasing less noticeable, so Chris is off the hook…) — 6×9 (Talk) 16:37, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
Well Done!, -thanks, 6! I'd make those images a little smaller (you know - I don't like any form of shouting neither in text nor in images), but that's absolutelly insignificant aesthetic habit :).
I'm just curious what does Mr. Dr. think about all that, - finally that's him who started this discussion... ;)
--Senvaikis (talk) 16:14, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
I think the Dr.'s "in the zone"… expect his input in a few weeks when he's through with your current list :-) — 6×9 (Talk) 16:40, October 12, 2014 (UTC)

I've merged my code into the template. On non-ns0 pages it behaves as previously, in ns0 as on my test page. The question of severity threshold remains – any suggestions? (Though Frankie deserves his 3 without doubt…) — 6×9 (Talk) 10:28, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

While we are waiting for suggestions about the new split boundaries, let me remind about some other, (more important imo) tasks:
  1. moving existing old {{Split}}s into their new proper place (artist page), for two consistency reasons:
    • informatics - it's not a good practice to keep objects of different type (artists & talk pages) in one category (severity)
    • bureaucratic - see below
  2. using the chance to start finally synchronize our docs to currently working set of templates, rules etc.. :)
Cheers, --Senvaikis (talk) 11:42, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
Getting impatient, are we? ;-) I'd leave at least 1. until thresholds are agreed upon, so we can update artists in one pass.
Main reason why I'd prefer to count only blue links is that it's easier to determine for non-bots: you don't have to count all links, just get the count from the "Songs by Artist" cat.
So here's my (first, rough) suggestion as a starting point: i = count(os) - count(all) / 5; low: 5 <= i < 20; moderate: 20 <= i < 75; severe: i >= 75. No tl:split for i < 5. — 6×9 (Talk) 17:56, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
Lol, - no, relax, 6 - that really wasn't an impatience-dictated note (or at least I haven't thought it was) ;).
Regarding thresholds: yes, you are right, any more or less complicated dynamic criterium, easy realizable for bot, may be incovenient for users. Even C:SbA.count checking may discourage some users... Moreover that in some cases any strictly-defined criterium just can't fit the real situation. An alternative could be static (os.count-only dependant) thresholds with some "floating/overlapping" boundaries, leaving such way more degrees of freedom for users? Like this draft:
Possible {{Split}} thresholds
Split OS count
0-5 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-70 70-80 >80
No split       
Though truth to tell, after preview of this "simplified" approach, I'm no longer sure it's really simplified. Anyhow, it's at least made with patience and nicelly coloured ;)--Senvaikis (talk) 08:30, October 14, 2014 (UTC)
Lwt has selected info (name, Os.count and blue-songs.count) for all artists, having OS>=5. Here's a brief evaluation of possible artists distribution by severity, based on different threshold models:
Method Dynamic Static
Boundaries 5-20-75 10-30-80 5-20-75 10-30-80
No split 7780 15271 2509 11022
Split1 11951 5625 15313 8773
Split2 2065 920 3809 1880
Split3 125 105 290 246
Total 1-3 14141 6650 19412 10899
Total 21921
Hope this info may be usefull, chosing the optimal thresholds scheme. It may be used to expose some intersting, sometimes unexpected results. For example, according to "dynamic" formula Bill Nelson with OS=129 (but BS=761) shouldn't be splitted at all (i=-23) :)
nite, --Senvaikis (talk) 20:24, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

If we're talking about changing templates, I got question/suggestion about "feature" templates. Is there any chance you'll extend this template? Maybe automatically created section with info about guest appearances on other artists tracks? I don't even know, that it's possible, but sounds like nice option to show more informations on artists pages. Ozpl (talk) 22:17, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, Oz, but atm this question is slightly offtopic indeed... What do you think about the main topic of this thread?--Senvaikis (talk) 08:30, October 14, 2014 (UTC)
I'm constantly looking at this thread and all changes that help bot and/or people are music to my ears. :) Though I'm not as familiar as you in technical stuff, I'll try to suggest some ideas/improvements if I find opportunity... However I'm glad I can help in some way. :) Ozpl (talk) 09:04, October 14, 2014 (UTC)
{{{1}}} Guess a linear function was too simple, maybe we need something like count(os) - a * log(count(all))… Kidding!
Nice colours; Red would definitely approve :-) I was confused at first because I got different counts in your xls, until I realised your thresholds were gt, not gte… Using >= increases total split to 12399.
How about this, for maximum simplicity + some degree of freedom: make boundaries static, but allow severity - 1 if count is near low threshold and number of allocated songs clearly exceeds it? E.g. 10/30/80, count(os) = 35, 10 albums -> split/1 instead of 2.
For lowest threshold I'm currently leaning towards >= 10, plus adding {{stub}} to artists with < 10 and no albums. — 6×9 (Talk) 08:38, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
  • Thresholds: sounds reasonable, I tend to agree. Seems we reached the stage, when discussion should be finished somewhere not on my talk page - that's unbelievable, but it appears that not all users start their day from my talk page reading :).
  • gt vs gte: updated, in case someone else would like to look at it
  • colours are terrible actually, but this note is addressed not to you, 6 - I know you know - that was a little joke, related to ugly shouting beauties :)
--Senvaikis (talk) 15:54, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Hello, it's me again! Thank you for getting my message. I see that a bunch of pages have been categorized. And it looks like I have a long way to go. It might take some time, though. Thanks again! --Dr. Beat (talk) 18:10, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome, but truth to tell I was expecting to see at least minimal your activity in this discussion (initiated by you, btw) and it's follow-up. ;)
--Senvaikis (talk) 19:09, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

Danger Danger

Hi. Can you please use Lwt in the page Danger Danger? I think the missing lyrics are in the web, so Lwt will find easily. Thank you. Songsbr (talk) 02:06, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

done, --Senvaikis (talk) 09:52, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

Ambiguous Artists: Pagenaming and Formatting

Wouldn't it be a good idea to add these guidelines to the help pages, or even better: make them a policy?  · Lichtweber talk service  21:35, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

  • ...add these guidelines to the help pages: strictly speaking, this guideline doesn't contain any new or absolutelly undocumented rules (just they are scattered through descriptions of different templates). This msg was written more like a short digest, collecting them into one place. But I agree that adding something similar to lw help could be usefull - you weren't the first, who's missed this scattered info :)
  • ...make them a policy: what do you mean? If you are speaking about making the second approach (using artist title without additional notation in his albums/songs pages) mandatory, then this question should be brought to a serious preliminary discussion on CP & AP imo - it's not so obvious to me. Keep in mind that ambiguous artist isn't the only possible target this approach may be used for (I mean artists with additional romanized notation in their pagename)...
--Senvaikis (talk) 14:00, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I see your point with the second approach.
Now, Arwen and I declared to help updating the help pages, and I am still in for that. But now that she died on us, I'd need a native English speaker to at least check on grammar and ortho. Maybe Nic would do that? I would then create a help page under the very same name as this section. Is that ok?  · Lichtweber talk service  14:21, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
Good idea to turn this into a separate help page. As far as I can judge (not being a native speaker myself) grammar etc. shouldn't be a problem either, unless you invest a lot more time and care on talk page postings than you plan to do on the help page… — 6×9 (Talk) 19:35, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
I just started a help page draft named "Homonymous Artists" and I'd also like to update the introduction to the "Artist" help page with a definition of what an artist is in LW terms. As we agreed on the policy discussion earlier, it's performers, lyricists and composers, right? I'd like to mention (rare) exceptions, such as "Muppets" or "The Simpsons", though.  · Lichtweber talk service  18:48, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
Please forgive me my old age with its sclerosis - could you please remind me a link to discussion with mentioned agreement? --Senvaikis (talk) 19:24, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
Sry, I now added the link to the section in my post above.  · Lichtweber talk service  20:01, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

Preview problems

Hi, some time ago I discovered problem with "Preview" option when editing some article. It was broken, when you hit it, whole page goes completely blank. Only page refresh could help, but then all of the changes disappears. There was a time, when it actually work and after some time period - again broken, so I guess it's my browser (I'm using Opera Beta 25)/something with plugin (I don't know that you even using extra plugins), but maybe it's more common problem. Should I be worried? :)

And btw. I'll ask about Lyrically app on Android. Is it still under development? I've noticed problem with loading some albums (doesn't show tracklist and/or year of album) and when checked it up on my PC, they aren't different than other, correctly shown albums. Any guess what it could be? Thanks in advice. :) Ozpl (talk) 14:31, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

That's funny, how do you manage asking me only questions I just can't answer - I'd like to help, but can't again :).
  • The same probs on my win7(64) with FF.33.0, Chrome.38.0.2125.104 & IE.11.09. So, that's not neither browser nor user prefs problem.
  • I'm not neither developer nor user of this app, so again -
-sorry, --Senvaikis (talk) 15:43, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
It's not a problem, I'm just curious about things, that aren't really relevant :P Ozpl (talk) 16:51, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
The preview issue is indeed browser independent; apparently it was introduced with some new type of ad back in August – see this topic. — 6×9 (Talk) 19:26, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
I can only add that the preview function with Firefox still works at least, although now you get a dialog presented, where you have to choose "Keep on page" to see the preview. For Chrome/Chromium I can recommend the addon "Lazarus: Form Recovery" to get your changes back after hitting preview accidentally. Greetings, --Fassbrause (talk) 14:02, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
Made a fix for the Preview problem today, it'll go out with the release next Wednesday (a week from tomorrow). -Sean Colombo (talk) 01:44, October 29, 2014 (UTC)

Thx, Sean! --Senvaikis (talk) 06:30, October 29, 2014 (UTC)

The "preview" fix on the classic editor seems to have gone out with the release yesterday... it appears to be working now :) Someone found out that the "visual editor" has a similar problem, so I'll be fixing that soon, too.
-Sean Colombo (talk) 18:32, November 6, 2014 (UTC)

Well Done! Labai ačiū, Thank you very much, Merci beaucoup, Большое спасибо, Vielen Dank, Muchas gracias, Muito obrigado, Sean!

Multiple (bonus) songs in one CD track

Hi again, just today someone created the song page Damien Rice:Eskimo / Prague / Silent Night. It contains the lyrics for 3 songs, as they are found in one track (with long pauses between) on the CD. See album on LW and album on WP Wikipedia16. I wasn't sure what to do with the page, as we already have separate song pages each of the tracks. Should I just redirect it to the first song, e.g. Eskimo? Greetings, --Fassbrause (talk) 13:58, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

Let's start from the fact, that these three songs just can't be formatted into one lw page for very simple reason - different performers. I'm not sure how wp tracklist should be interpretted: are both hidden tracks perfoormed by Lisa Hannigan or only "Silent Nigth", o was she just featuring. In either case I'd formatted this album with "Eskimo" as a separate 10'th track, adding next two as unnumbered (accordingly reformatted/renamed if needed) hidden tracks.
I redirected Damien Rice:Eskimo / Prague / Silent Night to "Eskimo", just to prevent possible recreating.
--Senvaikis (talk) 16:22, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! Well I wasn't sure either how to interpret the WP tracklist. I don't own the CD myself to check it. I listened to Silent Night through Spotify and its only Lisa Hannigan singing, yet she isn't credited anywhere, see for example Discogs release page. I just says "Vocals – Lisa Hannigan". The image of the back cover has no info either. The other track Prague isn't available there, so I can't help it. I believe it's best to let them be credited to Damien Rice.
--Fassbrause (talk) 16:49, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

Lwt forgot moving the talk pages?

Hi, I noticed Lwt moved some pages (1, 2) but left behind their talk pages (1, 2), so the songs ended up in Category:Invalid Pagerank. This isn't meant to happen, is it? I thought I should let you know! - OneTwoThreeFall talk 11:43, October 22, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for noting that - I fixed those 2 talkpages, but should confess: that wasn't just a short disorder of Lwts memory - just it never was trained to move talkpages together with their owners... That's my fault. I'd like to promise to fix that in nearest future, but I'll better be honest... ;) So, please, - keep an eye on Lwt moves, and fix remaining errors, if you can, - tia, --Senvaikis (talk) 12:18, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome. I will do my best to keep an eye out! Thanks, OneTwoThreeFall talk 16:49, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
Thanks to you I found a bug in Lwt code: api query parameter movetalk (move the talk page, if it exists) was left inactivated. The reason - misleading api description. Hope now you'll have less work :). Thanks once more! --Senvaikis (talk) 17:22, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
I'm glad I could help! - OneTwoThreeFall talk 17:57, October 22, 2014 (UTC)


Any idea why the preview in songs is not working? - S.S. (talk) 00:22, October 28, 2014 (UTC)

Any, - sorry. --Senvaikis (talk) 06:16, October 28, 2014 (UTC)

Editing box info

Hey, is there any template for info you guys (I mean administrators mainly) put into edit box or is it shortcuts made by you for your own purpose? :) Ozpl (talk) 17:02, October 29, 2014 (UTC)

Not sure if I understood your question - could you please explain in more details what info in what edit box are you talking about? --Senvaikis (talk) 17:22, October 29, 2014 (UTC)
When you edit some article, you can add some info about that edit, eg. what section you edited or what have you done etc. YOu put "?" in edit info ox in previous post. :) Ozpl (talk) 18:13, October 29, 2014 (UTC)
Excuse me if I still misunderstand something, but now it seems to me you are talking about the edit summary info. There is a special textbox field in any edit form page, dedicated for this info. Were you asking about that? --Senvaikis (talk) 18:28, October 29, 2014 (UTC)
Yup, I didn't knew exact name, but that's exactly what I was talking about. Ozpl (talk) 18:30, October 29, 2014 (UTC)

Fine then, may add only that adding a short edit summary is highly recommended for all users, not admins only ;) So, now I may summarize this thread with a summary "closed." :) --Senvaikis (talk) 18:39, October 29, 2014 (UTC)

Unlicensed or just forgotten?

Hey Senv,
remember that, before the whole GNLF merge started, most "unlicensed" songs had counterparts in the LF namespace? I once mentioned it to Sean, he replied that it probably was a queue thing, but the situation never changed… Imagine my surprise a while ago, when Sean accidentally deleted a valid page that had been in C:UL/LF, and after I undeleted it, the lyrics were displayed. Unfortunately I then forgot about this until today, but just now I tested it: deleted R.E.M.:Begin The Begin which had been unlicensed, restored all revisions – and, voilà, the lyrics magically appeared! Then did an edit – nope, I hadn't been dreaming, they're still there! 2nd test here, same result. One more reason to be glad when this whole LF mess is done… — 6×9 (Talk) 10:36, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Strangely enough (or maybe not strange at all, considering this is LF), even a page no pun intended moved from the LF namespace ended up unlicensed. Can you call something "buggy" when it's made up almost exclusively of bugs? — 6×9 (Talk) 11:00, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

 :). So, maybe you have some bright idea how remaining "GN/Lf-victims" of such kind could be detected/legitimized finally? --Senvaikis (talk) 16:09, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
Other than hoping they faithfully turn up in (the currently empty) C:UL/LF or that some user points them out – none, I'm afraid.
While I cleaned them out, some GN takedowns turned up as well; seems the code for LF takedown prevents content in lyrics tags to be parsed, so they appeared neither in C:UL nor in {{Gracenote takedown}}'s WLH. I hope that's the last we've seen of that, but I'm not too optimistic… — 6×9 (Talk) 17:20, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
Lol, - have you seen the current state of the samples (1, 2) you was so glad about? Seems we don't need any bright ideas for a while... --Senvaikis (talk) 17:41, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
Should have known it was too good to last. Oddly, the first one appeared unchanged until I touched it – must be seeing a different cache than you.
We'll see how many of the ~750 unlicensed pages will return… Maybe we should have kept the LF versions, so we could tell users "Sorry, LF doesn't allow us to display these lyrics, but you can view them here, on this very same site." Whoever said that sarcasm was the lowest form of wit completely missed the point – it's not meant to be witty, it's meant to be cathartic.6×9 (Talk) 18:02, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
Btw, initially I've thought that the subj of this thread was inspired by my comment to one very suspicious edit.
Now I'm not sure about that, moreover - now I'm pretty sure this edit wasn't suspicious - it's just a simple crime... ;) --Senvaikis (talk) 20:37, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
Kinda difficult to find a protected page if the only thing that marks it as protected is commented out… At least it only took 7 years for someone to notice lyrics' invisibility :-) — 6×9 (Talk) 11:34, November 3, 2014 (UTC)

Andre Moss vs André Moss

Hi Senvaiks, I batchmoved Andre Moss to André Moss, and I wanted to ask you if Lwt could fix the artist in the song headers accordngly? Thx,  · Lichtweber talk service  17:42, November 3, 2014 (UTC)

done --Senvaikis (talk) 18:06, November 3, 2014 (UTC)

Introducing new bot

Hey, in the near future, I want to write and launch a bot for our wikia, which will work with minor, purely visual stuff e.g. " , " to ", " or other annoying things (my perfectionism soul is suffering). That was my first thought, I don't know that this kind of bot is already working/not necessary, but I'd like to do that and constantly add some new things to improve bot and page. I want to write it based on some basic bots found in internet, because well, I'm a newbie for now. :) I'm going to make a precise plan - what and how I want to change things - if you need it, I'll sent it in few days. I've got a lot of work to do, though I want to know, that I'm not doing it unnecessarily. :) Should I make second account to testing? And do I your have agreement? :) Thanks in advice. Ozpl (talk) 13:15, November 6, 2014 (UTC)

I like your ardour, Oz, but you again have asked me a question I can't give you a full and qualified answer :). Seems you still don't know that my Lwt actually isn't a true bot, ergo - I hardly could be useful to you as adviser in bot-related questions. You should try to speak with my friend Six, another our admin - he's loaded his own bot recently and, in addition, knows all the remaining Answers to Life, the Universe and Everything, thus certainly would be more suitable consultant for you.
But before you go to 6, let me ask you one question (dictated by my best intentions, though I know it may look little... impolite) - are you really ready to start your own bot on LW? Keep in mind that bot may be very useful, but at the same time may turn into dangerous destructive weapon, if improperly used. Do you feel having enough lw-editing experience for driving such a weapon? You do? Then I'd recommend you to become a trusted user for the beginning, while preparing for boat loading in the background.
And feel free to continue asking me all kind (but desirably not perl- or php-related) questions. I hope one day will come when I'll be able to answer ;)
Btw, I still hope you haven't forgot your promise ;). Keeping it would be a nice step in direction to the status of trusted user... ;)
Cheers, --Senvaikis (talk) 16:56, November 6, 2014 (UTC)
Lwt is a program-sort-of-thing I think, though I thought you can give some advices - "D'Oh" again. :)
I'm tester type of guy. I'd rather polish (and learning) him, that maybe he would never see a daylight. :) I love trial and error way of working, so I would finally find a way to go.
I'm not that long here, so I don't really know much about user groups, which I'll now give a look - especially "Trusted".
Oh, I'll do, a lot even. I know I might be annoying (I'm pretty sure I am :), but I'm curious about stuff I really like and enjoy and you've became my victim in doing so...
And about that, I remember all the time, but for that I need a late, fall evening with cup of chocolate next to my monitor. :) I just need to be in melancholic mood, because I'm busy man matter of fact. :) Though it lands on my profile (that's a thing for me!), so don't you worry, I'll try to narrow it time to time. With very best intensions :) Ozpl (talk) 17:27, November 6, 2014 (UTC)

Blank pages

Yes I will. Please, be patient :-) --Dante81 (talk) 22:15, November 6, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks and ok, I'll try :). Btw, you don't need to respond on my talk page, - it's recommended to keep a discussion on the same thread it has been started. Regards, --Senvaikis (talk) 08:13, November 7, 2014 (UTC)
I see, I did not know, thank you. --Dante81 (talk) 17:20, November 13, 2014 (UTC)

SongFooter - how to add links manually

Hey! I've been trying to add links where you can buy/download/listen to songs to the bottom of their pages for a while but am unsure of how! Is there a guide that goes in to detail about how to add links to every section? The ones in particular I have trouble wit hare Amazon and Thanks!

Tysunae (talk) 06:02, November 8, 2014 (UTC)

I think I know the answer, so I relieve Sen. :) All info about this template, you'll find here. If you are want to leave a message, add new section by "==Section name==", so its easier to navigate. Hope, I've helped. :) Ozpl (talk) 08:34, November 8, 2014 (UTC)

Bot keeps adding orphaned songs


I see the bot added back a few songs I removed from 'Other Songs' in Bob's section. Isn't there anyway to remove pages?

i.e. the song titled "Everybody Must Get Stoned" is actually "Rainy Day Woman #12&35". and, a few of these songs Bob Dylan have never performed either live or in studio, i.e. "The Ghost of Tom Joad" and "Hawkmoon 269".

And most of these titles are just misspelling of real song titles.

Regards, SirDogg — The preceding unsigned comment was added by SirDogg (talkcontribs), 13:40, November 10, 2014 (UTC).

Hi, Sir.
first of all - thanks for your contribs to Bob's page - he really deserves more our attention.
Adding orphaned songs to OS actually is one of tasks of this bot, - it'd be a bad bot, if not added them :). In other words, simple song removing from OS doesn't delete the song page itself, just makes it orphaned again, i.e. doesn't solve nothing - sooner or later (on the next bot run) it'll reappear in OS again.
So how then the song may be removed from OS? There are three possible solutions for this tasks:
  1. Song exists and was really performed by an artist, but isn't included into either of LW-albums: we should create a page for an album, containing this song. If that's impossible (performed live-only, unreleased etc), then song should be included into one of sections, dedicated for such case (==Unreleased Songs==, ==Songs on Bootlegs==, ==Live Appearances== etc). Any available info may be appended as additional notation to each item in these sections (date and time of live performance, bootleg name/date, album which was initially supposed to contain this recording etc)
  2. Song exists but wasn't ever performed by this artist: redirection to correct page should be done, i. e. we should find the real performer of this song and redirect it to the correct page, if it exists, or move (with redirection), if it doesn't.
  3. Song doesn't exist at all: In some cases (badly formatted title, bad accents, reliable info about etc) song may be just deleted: just add a deletion request on the very top of the page text. See {{deletion}}, and don't forget to include the reason for deletion request. This solution can't be used for songs which may be reuploaded due to some "popular" mistitling. If such deletion can't be initiated, and there's no info about any artist, performing this song, then remains only one - move it to songs, performed by "Unknown Artist"...:)
Sorry, was intended to recheck above text, but should leave, thus forgive me all the typos & mistakes; feel free to reask if my broken English wasn't clear enough.
cheers,--Senvaikis (talk) 14:48, November 10, 2014 (UTC)
Well, I'm back again. You've made some revisions to the moment, and one of them may be taken as a perfect sample, when redirect is much more preferrable compared to deletion. If I deleted this page, mistitled pagename would remain "empty", while redirect to the correctly titled page leaves this namespace "occupied", preventing such way from possible reuploading in the future. In addition, contrary to deletion, you don't need any admin help to make redirects.
hth, --Senvaikis (talk) 17:25, November 10, 2014 (UTC)
P.S. don't forget to sign your messages (with "~~~~") and avoid crossposting :)
Let's try once again: use deletion request only when you know for sure that such song doesn't exist at all (confirming info from any reliable source is highly desirable). Statement "this song was performed by various other artists" doesn't mean that this artist haven't performed it also, thus hardly such request will be ever satisfied by any admin. Please, try to be more specific in your deletion requests reasoning.
But here's the most important part: most (if not all) of your deletion requests actually may and should be replaced by redirects. So, please, take a look at this sample and do the rest by yourself :)
Good luck, --Senvaikis (talk) 19:18, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

Some edit questions

Hi, it's me again :) I'll start with request: compare album covers in Bear Vs. Shark:Terrorhawk (2005) and in Bear Vs. Shark artist page and tell me why second one is still an old version. I don't know, is it broken or something messed up with code, but it just can't refresh to a proper one version... Second thing: I want to ask about few lines in here. It's first time I see "< Bear Vs. Shark:The Great Dinosaurs With Fifties Section | Bear Vs. Shark:Entrance Of The Elected >" kind of thing and I want to ask: can I use this type of formula on other pages? Because I like it a lot, though I don't know, that this is going to be deleted or if not, is it properly written? Should it be more lucid, or at the top of page for example? I want to know your official position in this case (Less Than Jake mistakes were made :)... And had one more thing, though it flew out of my head. :) I'll probably leave a message once again, but for now thanks in advice. :) Ozpl (talk) 14:22, November 12, 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Oz
Should leave for some time, thus try to be short:
  • No, such navigation at the footer isn't forbidden, - don't be afraid it'll be deleted ( though I'm not so excited about its usefulness as you ;) )
  • Moreover - you may find at least 3 "navigational" templates ({{Navigate}}, {{Nav}} and {{Footer Nav}}), specially designed for this task ( though again - for my taste all these templates are just terrible... :) )
cu later, --Senvaikis (talk) 15:04, November 12, 2014 (UTC)
If it isn't forbidden, I shall work work on it in my lab and maybe I'll create something "visually acceptable", because you're right with these 3 templates. Though I see potential in navigating box sort-of-thing or similiar to that idea. :) Ozpl (talk) 15:28, November 12, 2014 (UTC)

Mozart L'opera Rock vs. Mozart L'Opéra Rock

Batchmove done, could Lwt fix SH on moved pages, please? Thx,  · Lichtweber talk service  19:43, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but I really have no idea how SHs of these pages should be "fixed". I just don't understand how could the simple batchmove make a magic transform of pseudoartist page... into legitimate artist page? And what then should these SHs contain? "Performed by Mozart L'Opéra Rock"? What I'm missing here? --Senvaikis (talk) 21:26, November 14, 2014 (UTC)
Seems I am the one who missed something. Nevertheless, would that be a task for a bot: fetching tracklist from discog and rename pages accordingly? Sorry for asking, but I'm afraid I do not really know what task would be appropriate for a bot, since I never used one. In fact, I never really saw one. Cheers,  · Lichtweber talk service  11:39, November 15, 2014 (UTC)
In case you haven't noticed: I am being serious. After all, Lwt ennobled the page by adding external sources ...  · Lichtweber talk service  12:43, November 19, 2014 (UTC)
Would you be so kind to explain me the meaning of the statement about your seriousness? For my Lithuanian ears it sounds like a categorical demand to do something what I just must, but maliciously refuse doing. I really hope you didn't mean nothing similar.
Regarding Lwt: any bot just under definition can't ennoble any page, 'cause it doesn't make any decisions. It may just add an external link to a page, if such link exists, but that doesn't legitimize any pseudoartist page. --Senvaikis (talk) 14:30, November 19, 2014 (UTC)
My question about what a task for a bot could be was serious, i.e. not ironical or sth. and so I was really hoping for a serious answer to my question.  · Lichtweber talk service  16:15, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

Once you've got already a quite serious answer to this question (see *mutual support). Short resume is: that's not a task for a bot. That's a task for you. --Senvaikis (talk) 17:09, November 19, 2014 (UTC)


Hello Senvaikis Can you move all songs of Amélie Les Crayons to the correct artist Amélie-les-crayons ? It's a lot of work, and if you have a script for that, it's time to use it :) I don't know if it should be spelled as Amélie-Les-Crayons or left as Amélie-les-crayons. Thank you. Lirfie (talk) 20:53, November 18, 2014 (UTC)

done, --Senvaikis (talk) 21:53, November 18, 2014 (UTC)

Artists without solo career

Hey, I've tried to find an answer for this question: what should I do when specific artist is a member of many different bands (e.g. 3 or 4) and he doesn't have any solo songs? Should his page even exist? Or it should be similiar to disambiguation page? I guess when he's in 1 band, I can simply add redirect, but what should I do when he was in multiple bands? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ozpl18 (talkcontribs).

Usually we shouldn't create a separate page for an artist, having no solo/collab/featured recordings. He/she may be listed in AI sections of other artists/bands or in CreditBoxes, but then we should avoid creating LW link ([[...]]) to unexisting page - use better WP-link instead, if WP page, dedicated to this artist, is available, or just plain text otherwise. --Senvaikis (talk) 18:42, November 19, 2014 (UTC)


I miss LWT, any chance I can get a copy? ES (talk) 21:28, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

Gladly, if only current Lwt version supported multiple accounts... In addition, now it uses a bunch of web apis, requiring my registered account authentication. So, it should be completely rewritten/cropped for such shared using. I should think about that, but hardly I'll be able to do that until NY...
Anyways, feel free to delegate all your crazy tasks to Lwt-residing-here, as we've been doing that successfully earlier :)
nite, --Senvaikis (talk) 22:30, November 19, 2014 (UTC)
I doubt I can justify asking you to do a rewrite for me. In case you had an older copy still around (from 2 yrs ago?), I could use it for operations strictly within LW, as I used to. Meanwhile kindly let me know where to post my requests for bot ops. cheers ES (talk) 22:54, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

Artist Maladies

IIRC, back when earth was young, LWT was detecting multi header/footer artists and listing it on a page. Any chance of an occasional run to detect missing header/footer artist? ES (talk) 13:15, November 20, 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, artist with multple heads/foots still remains a member of Category:Artist, so lwt could walk through this cat, searching for maladies. What through should it "walk" now? I just can't recall if I've ever seen headless "artist"...:) Could you point me at least one example of a page, inspired you for such a task? --Senvaikis (talk) 13:29, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
Hammock, left it alone for LWT's entertainment ;) Also it appears that a headless artist remains in artist category, but we still want a way of finding and fixing it. ES (talk) 13:58, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
Yes, Hammock is the member of C:Artist, but... Lwt failed to find him there...:) Wanna try to look where Lwt was looking for? And what you see? That's why I was really missing you... :)
Ok, should make a short break, - cu later, --Senvaikis (talk) 14:35, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
Seems I've found a workaround for this situation - Lwt should walk through C:Artist, but ordered by date, not alphabetically. Hope that should help, but I need to rewrite some Lwt procedures for such task.
Anyway - Well Done!, --Senvaikis (talk) 14:58, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
It's deceptive, on the artist page with either head or tail missing it appears that page is memeber of C:Artist. Obviously your workaround (I don't understand why sort order has any effect on detection) should come handy for album and song pages as well. Back in the old days of using the wiki bot framework (Aquatiki era) there was no way to sort cats...
Tangent: I heard that .NET will be ported to Mac as well...mmmm! ES (talk) 15:17, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
Sort order does have effect, 'cause date-sorting doesn't bother the fact that Hammock isn't an Artist H. Yes, category itself can't be reordered by date, but api-"walking" through it may be ordered either alphabetically or by date as well.
But the most funny thing is that now I'm pretty sure: there's no need in any lwt rewriting (at least for this task): Hammoch (and supposedly - all his possible companions in misfortune) may/should be easily found without any Lwt help... here, at the very top of the list, next to our Wizard :) Seems your sample is the only one such artist page atm :)
Let me know if I'm wrong :), --Senvaikis (talk) 15:44, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
P.S. Btw, there's nothing strange that footerless page still remains in C:A, 'cause that's an ArtistHeaders "business" :)

I'll summarise:
1- If AH missing --> page goes to Page Needing ArtistHeader
2- If AF missing --> shows at top of C:Artist, right there with Zix!
3- If AH & AF missing --> LWT can find it?
ES (talk) 16:35, November 20, 2014 (UTC)

Lol, - sure Lwt can (at the cost of "walking" through all pages), but what are you gonna do with such a huuuge list of subpages, lists, etc etc? Don't you think that definiton of search target should be slightly tightened? --Senvaikis (talk) 17:26, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
Yes very costly to make it totally foolproof, cuz they are so inventive. I doubt losing both AH&AF at once will be accidental ;) I have no idea why I even looked at the innards of ES (talk) 18:08, November 20, 2014 (UTC)

New task for LWT

Hey, I got some artists to fill with lyrics. :) Lyrics are in polish, so I don't think you'll find all of them, though it's much more conveniant than manual adding: 2cztery7, 52 Dębiec, Bez Cenzury, Buka, Fabuła, JWP, L.U.C & Rahim, Małpa, Rahim, Szad, Wiele C.T. Thanks in advance and this time I won't forget about signature :) Ozpl (talk) 16:00, November 21, 2014 (UTC)

I'd like even more if you haven't forgot our agreement regarding lyricless albs and the promise to fix your black-list...
I'll try to do my best with above artists, but be fair and try to do your best too - keep the promise ;)
--Senvaikis (talk) 16:54, November 21, 2014 (UTC)

No Matter What

When you cleared the YouTube video from "No Matter What," you mentioned something about remaining problems. What are the problems that are still there? I want to get everything as good as possible so if there are other issues, please let me know so I can fix them up. ProfessorTofty (talk) 17:41, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

The main problem with this page is that it creates more problems than solves.
  • First of all, it's still orphaned, or homeless - there's no any LW page (neither artist nor album), having a link to it yet. Yes, I agree - that may be fixed, at least partialy (hope you are going to create an album page for "Doc McStuffins: Cuddles And Care (2013)").
  • Another, more serious problem - performers. Providing lw-links to all four performers "define" them as an "artists" in lW terms, rising such way one more, hardly solvable problem. Every such red-link (dead-link) should be "resolved" - in other words, LW page for each "artist" should be created by you or someone else. But should we really strive to create a pages for all such artists, having any solo release? I'm not sure. Truth to tell, I'm pretty sure we shouldn't.
Please, don't take these notes as some reproach, - that's more a list of questions, answers to which still aren't quite clear for myself... :)
regards, --Senvaikis (talk) 20:27, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
    • Sure, I do plan to create a page for Doc McStuffins: Cuddles and Care. Should be easy enough; it's a six song digital album. I'll go ahead and create it a bit later this evening. As for the latter issue, yeah, I don't know if it's really ideal to have individual pages for all of them either. With some of the PB&J Otter I'm doing it has as many as six people or more per song and all of them ones that otherwise haven't really released albums or anything. ProfessorTofty (talk) 02:04, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Top of the morning to you!

Senv, are you editing with LWT from your account to scare the hell out of the Islamic State? :)) ES (talk) 07:58, November 24, 2014 (UTC)

No, the reason is more pragmatic: just Lwt tries to recollect yet unspotified songs. One of possible reasons why page hasn't been processed yet - protection. That's why Lwt has borrowed my account temporarily. Does that scare you? :)
Btw, on ocasion you are here, let me ask you - was it so necessary to create almost full discography of Raymond Scott, containing, if I'm right, just one song with lyrics? I do believe there was some reason for that, but then it would be better to finish te job with this page: create all currently red-linked albs, removing such way their albumcover images from Category:Album art without album.
cheers, --Senvaikis (talk) 08:23, November 24, 2014 (UTC)
Hardly full discography! Why should we treat Raymond Scott any differently than Joe Satriani ;)? As for Not creating album pages in a rush, you must have noticed that I am not a great fan of making album pages... but that is a differnt rant for another time...and thanks for the explanation ES (talk) 08:38, November 24, 2014 (UTC)

Album Arrangement

A kwiki! Senv, are we ok with this arrangement? ES (talk) 20:05, November 27, 2014 (UTC)

Though next to Lwt I'm not very excited about it, but it's not forbidden, afaik :) --Senvaikis (talk) 20:34, November 27, 2014 (UTC)
Neither is this forbidden... imho not the kind of example we want to proliferate. encouraging me to knock on 6's door? ;) ES (talk) 20:48, November 27, 2014 (UTC)
The latter is forbidden (in my understanding of LW pagenaming and pagelink formatting policy), --Senvaikis (talk) 20:59, November 27, 2014 (UTC)
No need to knock… 1st one I could do without (doesn't look that great, with left album art being closer to right tracklist than left one) but not really problematic – 2nd one ohhellno. Def. wouldn't want that to spread. (Add "good taste" to Senv's reasons for forbiddenness.) — 6×9 (Talk) 21:14, November 27, 2014 (UTC)
I like how 6 appears when I think of him! And then I just remember to look here only to discover this creativity applied to OS. imho use of that template on artist pages is a malady; indicating reissues can be achieved without straying from 99% of the rest of the site artist pages. ES (talk) 21:19, November 27, 2014 (UTC)

Homer Guidance

Senv I see your nifty creation does regular runs (SNLI), can you please run a touch schedule on Category:Homeless Songpage? tia ES (talk) 08:54, November 28, 2014 (UTC) my greasy creations is clogging up the works! P.S. with Maple Syrup on top ;)

Sure, that's possible, - just I should find some spare time for LWC (sheduled LWClient) rewriting. Hourly touching would be unreasonable imo - what would you say about daily cycle?
Regarding your creations: I'm not quite sure if I got correctly the meaning of your message, thus just tried to add my 2 pennies everywhere I found it was possible ;). One my edition (blank albs uncommenting) may be discussed in more details: usualy I avoid creating album with any blue songlink on it, but for disambigued artists I make an exception. There are several reasons for such exception, and the main two are: a) preventing miscreations in the future, b) making a donkeywork of complicated job with all those "aliases", "albumartists" etc. If you disagree with such point of view - I'm ready to listen :) --Senvaikis (talk) 11:36, November 28, 2014 (UTC)
  • re:scheduled touch of the homeless; once a week would be perfect. IIRC cat touch was already in lwt...
  • re:redlink albums of disambiguated: I am in total agreement. My edit comment was to inform... ES (talk) 13:00, November 28, 2014 (UTC)

an Exception

While the Iron is hot: Exile (Disambiguation): now we have two americans: Move US to KY, then move Rapper to US? Can't use CA as it stands for Canada; my two pennies.ES (talk) 13:08, November 28, 2014 (UTC) stirring the cream as usual

Two possible solutions (I'd prefer the 2'nd):
  1. Universal: .(US) -> .(US-KY); .(Rapper) -> .(US-CA)
  2. Default: Exile (US) -> Exile; .(Rapper) -> .(US)
--Senvaikis (talk) 15:06, November 28, 2014 (UTC)
P.S. Just forgot to mention alernative (lazy) solutions:
  1. Lenient: Leave .(US) unchanged, .(Rapper) -> .(US-CA)
  2. Hard: leave both unchanged ;)
  1. Universal: .(US) -> .(US-KY); .(Rapper) -> .(US-CA)
yes that was how we did it 2 years ago and I bet that is how you have been disambiguating the conflicty ones.
In other news, contrary to what I thought, (I actually checked now) and I do have my copy of lwt, v. 3.0.5. What do you suggest I do with it? Chase 42 down the hall? ;) ES (talk) 15:42, November 28, 2014 (UTC)
  • Disambig: 1'st (universal) approach is good for artists of comparable notability. But when one of artists is incomparably more famous, the second approach is preferable not only for searchability reasons, but just following a simple logics: what for almost every potential search should travel through redundant redir + redundant click on required artist link?
  • Oldies: If it's still alive - feel free to use it. Should I remind you that all the responsibility for possible damages due to bugs and other "beauties" of deprecated program will lay on you? ;)
--Senvaikis (talk) 16:18, November 28, 2014 (UTC)
Exile: that goofy redir musta been inspired by the fact that all listed artists are equally obscure!
oldies & goodies: Indeed as was always the case. Rake? what rake?! ES (talk) 11:49, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
Need guidance with Crowbar. Canadian band predates the american one. Who gets prime spot? tia ES (talk) 11:49, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
US one. Notability takes precedence over firstness and over Canadianness, even if it hurts ;-), as does many albums over few. — 6×9 (Talk) 12:03, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
I'm happy with any excuse to avoid YA batch move! ES (talk) 12:16, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Wanted artists

Hey Senv,
a while ago I gave you a list of LF artists which your magic turned into an excel sheet with it, mb & dog ids. Could you do the same for these GN artists please? No hurry, they won't run away. — 6×9 (Talk) 09:01, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Are you interested in all extIDs (wp, ma, pa, yt, spot etc) or only 3 listed (iT, mb & dog)?--Senvaikis (talk) 11:10, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
If you give me more than those three, I'll add them in as well! Main concern is to create artist pages where appropriate & batchmove GN songs, but more links are welcome. — 6×9 (Talk) 11:37, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
Lol, what a gawk I am, - made a form for your task (getting extIDs for given list of LW-artists) and got... an empty list... Yep, - that was the most suitable moment to realize that you was asking about extIDs of not-yet-LW-artists... :). Well, that changes the task essentially, shifting the terms of realisation and reducing reliability of results (no need to speak about reliability of searching just by name, without rechecking by artists albs/songs).
My apologies, - getting old --Senvaikis (talk) 15:39, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, guess I could have made things clearer by linking to last time… But look on the bright side – getting old means you aren't yet :-) — 6×9 (Talk) 17:36, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
done Done, see GN artists on ext sources.xls.
Now you'll ask me where's dog, and that's The Question... (see below) --Senvaikis (talk) 22:25, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Match type is really helpful in finding stuff that's already on LW…
Wish I could help you with Lwt, but last time I did any C# programming (and I'm using that term loosely) was > 2 years ago… If all else fails, you could create a SOAP web service in PHP and have Lwt access that… or make it run an external python script ;-) guess I'm more sysadmin than programmer – ready to patch anything together as long as it works6×9 (Talk) 10:26, November 30, 2014 (UTC)


:Don't know if you've heard that, but starting from August discogs api has been "improved" by adding requirement of mandatory authentication with OAuth. Shame on me, but I'm still unable to write OAuth .Net wrapper for Lwt, and all this time dog api remains unavailable for us...

That's a perfect occasion to ask for a community help:
  • "Hey, is here anyone, knowing .NET and able to help Lwt?"
tia, --Senvaikis (talk) 22:25, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
done!--Senvaikis (talk) 09:25, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Dupe gold pages

In case you had missed it...Category:Songs by Team StarKid. ES (talk) 09:25, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure you wanted me to answer this msg? Don't you think Eladkse would be a better choice? ;) --Senvaikis (talk) 19:05, December 1, 2014 (UTC)
Well you have created listing of problematic pages ranked beyond green. The example above happen to contain duplicated songs all certified gold by the same editor! That certainly makes them notable on your mal-ranked pages ;) ES (talk) 17:41, December 2, 2014 (UTC)

Making sense

What is the problem with uploading this file? It's not making sense to me GreyVireo (talk) 13:33, December 2, 2014 (UTC)

So, you have read all our documentation about page naming, formatting and file uploading policy, but still can't find any sense in notes/revisions/deletions of three(!) experienced admins, which have been repeatedly trying to correct your mistakes? Then hardly you become happier if I explain that image has been deleted after it became unused. It became unused, 'cause it was an albumart for a single, which was deleted. Single was deleted, because it was redundant, i.e. didn't contain any song, unavailable on other studio albums.
I know you'll not like that, but I just haven't any better suggestion: if you really want to find more sense in being here, please, - make a break in your edits and start reading docs again. Study the best practice, other users discussions. Ask any questions, if you find some our rules not quite clear. Then maybe you understand what a hell is "redundancy", why unused/duplicate images should be deleted, how should you communicate with other users, respond to their revisions/messages, how should you post/format your own messages, etc etc. Happy studies, looking for more sense, --Senvaikis (talk) 17:18, December 2, 2014 (UTC)

Why is the file being deleted? Wedlock: BlackSundress(Hagiphonic) (2013)?

What is wrong with it?GreyVireo (talk) 07:21, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

Haven't you read above msg? Then - once again: this single is redundant in terms of LW policy (doesn't contain any song with lyrics, unavailable on other sudio albums). --Senvaikis (talk) 07:37, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

Undo Youtube links with country restriction

I've done some 100 'undo's' now, Senvaikis. Just to be sure: what I'm doing right now: that's what I'm supposed to do? I'll wait for your answer before I get moving on with it. --Markcoutinho (talk) 17:50, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

So, you've changed 79 pages, and now I should walk through all them, checking what was the removed yt, what restrictions were applied on it, and decide if the remove was reasonable? And all that - without any your comment about any criteria your job was based on? Seems we need to bring some clarity to the basics of our future cooperation. As you possitively could notice, I'm always ready to help and collaborate, but if you want to get the most benefit from this collaboration - please, try to use better the power of my Lwt, but don't expect me to make some massive manual job for you :)
Well, let's return to your question. I've checked some of your fixes and should say that I failed to detect your criteria for selecting pages to be fixed. It was natural to expect that preference will be given to YTs with maximal number of "denied" countries. But seems your choice was based on some more sophisticated criteria, unknown for me. So, for a while I may only list some questions:
  • don't you think that fact of being denied in DE shouldn't be taken into account at all (otherwise most of yts should be removed...)
  • Are you going to remove all YTs with any count of contries in deny-list? (sample: YT of Aerosmith:Eyesight To The Blind was denied only in AU & DE. Keeping in mind the exceptional DE situation, actually remains only AU)
  • Haven't you tried to look for alternative, "undenied" YTs availability? (sample: yt on the same page could be replaced by DE-only denied UqjbcZmk2y8)
nite, --Senvaikis (talk) 21:22, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

I definitely do not want you to check each and every item, Senvaikis. The reason why I'm asking is just to be sure we're on the same level. And as it appears: we were not :-) I thought that you meant yesterday that each and every YT with some 'denied' should be removed. So I sorted your sheet on that and started with it. The count for that would be something like 4000-something.

  • Do I understand you right that maybe I should keep all the YT's with just one restriction? My suggestion would be to remove all of them, just to make your statistics as clean as possible. However: I'll be happy to leave it to your opinion
  • For something like 10 songs I've checked other links, but they all appeared to have the same 'denied'. So my guess is that such would be the case for all other YT's
  • In the meantime I've started to make new YT-links for new songs (I've arrived at Bob Seger at the moment) and I've built in the 'denied' check. For Bob Marley it appears that all songs are restricted here, there and everywhere. So from now on the percentage of wrong YT-links will be smaller and smaller

I'm going to bed now too. Talk to you tomorrow! --Markcoutinho (talk) 21:50, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

I've never meant that "each and every YT with some 'denied' should be removed", - why should the regrettable diligence of GEMA be spread world-wide? (98% of all yts, denied in a single country, are denied namely in Germany). And in no way I've never claimed any right of dictating what yts should be removed, replaced or left untouched.
There are though some pure technically unambiguous cases, when yt should be definitely removed/replaced/moved:
  • "Not found" (116 eyts should be removed/replaced)
  • "Forbidden" (177 eyts should be removed/replaced)
  • "No Embedding" (77 eyts should be replaced or moved into
Regarding eyts with "denied" type restriction I may say only my humble personal opinion - I'd:
  • ignored all 4184 DE-bans
  • replaced (where possible) eyts with denied.count > 1
  • otherwise (if no replacement found), removed only widely-denied eyts (say, with denied.count >30).
And don't forget about alternative of eyt moving into - even "restricted" yt link is more usefull compared to nothing - it may lead to "unrestricted" video.
--Senvaikis (talk) 07:41, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
Just started to do the 'quick wins', Senvaikis. That is

1) remove all links which have more than 10 countries denied 2) remove the 'not found', 'forbidden' and 'no embedding' links

After that I'll get back to you and share my thoughs on what strategy to choose. Take care! --Markcoutinho (talk) 19:59, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

  • "No Embedding" (77 eyts should be replaced or moved into
--Senvaikis (talk) 20:08, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Hey! Great! Am I correct that you've ordere Lwt to do all the Youtube stuff? I was in the middle of it tonight when I discovered that. But... Does that mean I don't have to do anything at all with these links? Or is there any work left for me? :-) Let me know! Take care! --Markcoutinho (talk) 20:31, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

No, - relax, Marc - that doesn't mean you are fired ;). Lwt was told to fix only above mentioned "unambiguously invalid" YTs (flagged as "Not Found", "Forbidden" or "No Embedding"). All the rest - in your diligent hands :) --Senvaikis (talk) 20:47, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

So we've arrived at a time to make a 'decision' on the denied-links, Senvaikis :-) When I look at your Excel sheet I see the denied count is at most 8. I agree with you that DE (that's Germany, isn't it?) should not be taken seriously as far as it goes for this subject. My suggestion to you is: let's set a limit to 5 denyals. If a link exceeds that number it shouldn't be published. What's your opinion on that? If you agree, I'll get rid of the 66 links that are beyond that limit (in your Excel sheet). --Markcoutinho (talk) 08:46, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Truth to tell, I'd not like to be a chief justice here - there are over 1200 YTs, denied in more than 5 countries, and I'm not sure if we should delete any info, available for 98% of countries. I'd recommend you raising this question in our Community Portal to hear a public opinion of entire community. --Senvaikis (talk) 09:11, December 8, 2014 (UTC)


Senv can you please please check all these Passengers? At least one of them got on the bus without the proper paperwork! tia ES (talk) 19:21, December 5, 2014 (UTC)

I'm getting blind & gullible - checked all the bus and haven't found any deadhead on the board. Could you please specify which passenger seems doubtful to you and why? --Senvaikis (talk) 20:35, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
lol, like 6 said, if you are getting old, that means you ain't yet! My issue is disambiguation with suffix (Band) instead of say (UK). ES (talk) 02:37, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
I was the one who sorted out that Passenger mess - all three used to be on the one page. The reason I used suffix '(Band)' was because I couldn't see any other way to disambiguate (same hometown, genre, etc.). - OneTwoThreeFall talk 04:14, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, 123f. But it became policy that we only use geo tags (location based), (docs are most likely out of date) If you check Category:Disambiguated, all artist pages listed should be either unrtagged or geo tagged. Band/Group etc. is verboten ;) ES (talk) 04:28, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
I knew country tags was standard, but didn't know it was policy! I don't see another (non-confusing) way it can be done for the band Passenger, though? - OneTwoThreeFall talk 04:57, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
Primary artist remains untagged. (Band) becomes (UK). Future passengers from the british isles may be disambig'd by code for wales/scotland etc. We have a couple of SC's I think.
I believe it is policy even though it may not have made it into the documentation. 2 years ago that whole disambig'd artist category was a rat's nest with instances of same artist disambiguated multiple times by Artist(countryname) as well as Artist (Country code) and then cases of artist (Genre) and artist (rapper) etc. Allowing editors to choose how they disambiguate is a recipe for disaster. Thoughts? cheers ES (talk) 06:02, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
My thought was that 'Artist (Country code)' was preferred, but 'Artist (Genre)' was acceptable if it couldn't be disambiguated by hometown.
Personally, I think (UK) is not good because both are from the UK (that's what I meant by a non-confusing way), but if it's considered the rules... - OneTwoThreeFall talk 06:20, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
  • Gerontology: both you and 6 are too young to know that simple "linear" logics isn't applicable to aging process. If tou are getting blind, that indeed means that you aren't blind yet. But being old in no way doesn't mean you aren't still getting older.
  • Rules vs dogmas: I tend to agree with 123F. Even if country code-based additional notation were a policy (it isn't yet actually - that's just a best-practice-based recommendation for most common cases), I'd recommend to make an exception for this case. The best way to wreck any rule is converting it into a dogma.
--Senvaikis (talk) 09:26, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
The comment on aging is a joke Senv, don't pretend we are being serious!
Not dogma, i'm looking for a better way, when multiple band with same name come out of the same country or even same State (bound to happen with US, NY/CA) as it has with UK, why not use a number then? Bliss, Bliss (UK) Bliss (UK2)? Instead of Bliss (UK Genre)? genre is too subjective, we've been there before. ES (talk) 09:34, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
I'm with Senv & 123F here; disambig tag should make it clear which artist is meant, and numbers don't help that any. No offense to 123F… Although in the case of Passenger, the band has the added period, so disambig tag is actually unnecessary.
We'll need to add to the list of technical restrictions though: while pagenames starting with "/" don't appear to be invalid, linking to or creating such a page is rather tricky… — 6×9 (Talk) 11:25, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
Mark my words 6! Two Metal bands are going to come out of one country and break this genre scheme, Band (DeathMetal) and Band (TrashMetal)? Who wants to be the arbitrator of the sub genre?! ES (talk) 12:33, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
Then let's not restrict it to genre, but allow whatever is short and to the point. Like (Band)… — 6×9 (Talk) 12:57, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
Excellent, I doubt we'll need anything beyond that for those two metal bands out of Andalusia Artist (ES-Band) & Artist (ES). I guess now we can all get off Senv's bus and ride our bikes home :)) ES (talk) 14:30, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
OK, let me rephrase… Then let's not restrict it to genre, but allow whatever is short and to the point. E.g. (Band)… — 6×9 (Talk) 14:43, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
Yes fine, and we will make it abundantly clear in the documentation that the use of genre or whatever is short and to the point is only for the extreme cases of 1-identical name and 2-identical location, and not before those conditions have been met. ES (talk) 17:14, December 6, 2014 (UTC) Mazel Tov!

Rename page Billy Joe Shaver:Unshaven: Live at Smith's Olde Bar (1995)

Hi Senvaikis. Something went wrong with this page. Must be the : symbol that's twice in it. I can't get it changed. Could you... Please? Thanks! --Markcoutinho (talk) 09:08, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

(edit) Hold it, Senvaikis. It appears that ES is gonna change it! --Markcoutinho (talk) 09:33, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

done, as you know already (haven't noticed any prob with alb creating, btw). But this message is more dedicated to our previous topic (u2b stats). I wanted to inform you (and others), that Lwt has made a detailed Lw-wide YT validation. Data - in Excel file, brief summary - in chart. --Senvaikis (talk) 16:00, December 6, 2014 (UTC)


senv plz see It needs ur attention. ES (talk) 10:51, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Is that somehow related to me personally? Seems like vandal vulgaris - why can't you warn/blok him? --Senvaikis (talk) 11:00, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
I can't load the page to delete it, I think you are better equipped than I am, via cyborg ES (talk) 11:04, December 8, 2014 (UTC) I took all other actions except the page i linked 4 u
Well Done!ES (talk) 11:10, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
done. Strange, but I deleted it without any probs and without any silicon-help. Maybe you was trying to open it in edit mode? (You don't need to open the page in edit mode to delete it.) --Senvaikis (talk) 11:16, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
I am using Chrome, tried loading the page for view just like any other page (click), it would take a few seconds, some elements of the page blinked on for a millisecond, then everything disappeared, then I was left with a Blank page, which means I had no way of accessing the edit button/menu (edit:history/rename/protect/delete). This may be only the 2nd time ever that this has happened with any page for me!! I have noticed cyborg has Laser Sabers, Proton Torpedos and Nuclear hand grenades... ;) ES (talk) 11:38, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
Seems to me you have but don't use your own AK-47 (a customizable toolbar), lying at the bottom of your page... screenshot taken from Chrome. --Senvaikis (talk) 16:41, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
That has been buggy for me, even in the olden days, I will try again and see if the changes I make in the toolbar stays. But speaking of WMD, do you mind applying a choice weapon to "No Big Deal" and it's child that has been sitting in S:LP for a couple years now?! ES (talk) 17:55, December 8, 2014 (UTC) IIRC, u have deleted a few undeletables in the past...
I'd like to have a usual fun, "deciphering" your encoded Q, but unfortunatelly am a little bussy atm, thus would be fine if you expanded abbreviations WMD & S:LP for me, - tia, --Senvaikis (talk) 19:47, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
For WMD you'll have to ask GWB, but SLP is Orphaned Pages, and the two NBD songs were inaccessible through normal means due to trailing whitespace. Should be OK now. Sorry, must be the Glühwein.6×9 (Talk) 20:07, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Perfect :-)) --Senvaikis (talk) 20:18, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

SPAM blog posts

While you're at it, what do you think about blog post like User blog:Cudorada/ & User Lyricers...? I would consider them spam and delete, as both users only registered to post such messages without contributing any lyrics etc... --Fassbrause (talk) 14:00, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

I blocked the first user cuz that's obvious. With slap, I am not quite sure what his/her intentions are so I was thinking about leaving him a message which says that using the name of an actual website as a user name is a bad idea. What do you think, Senv?  · Lichtweber talk service  15:47, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
agree--Senvaikis (talk) 15:54, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
done  · Lichtweber talk service  15:59, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! Yes, messaging sounds more reasonable I guess :) I found one more: User blog:Cristiancd/lyrics web. The same applies likely for User blog:Shmooa2/shmooa2 (?) --Fassbrause (talk) 16:07, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
Sheesh, shmooa could be a cover for the islamic state lol ES (talk) 16:13, December 8, 2014 (UTC)


Would it be possible for Lwt to place 'Display Title' for all songs/albums for an artist? The artists in question being Blessthefall and Coldrain. (Not that I'm doubting Lwt's impressiveness, of course ;)) Patzilla777 (talk) 20:31, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Sry, if I've misunderstood your request, but do you really speak about placing {{DISPLAYTITLE}} into songs & albs? But maybe you are speaking about {{SongHeader}}.alias and {{Album}}.Alias? Take a look Blessthefall:Awakening (2011) & Blessthefall:Awakening and let me know if that's exactly what you expected.
Btw, excuse my ignorance - why it's so important for these artists? :)
--Senvaikis (talk) 21:03, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
I mean the actual title of the pages (e.g. Blessthefall:Awakening instead of Blessthefall:Awakening, much like A-ha and T.A.T.u). Patzilla777 (talk) 21:13, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
Got it finally :). Not now, but sooner or later Lwt'll do that for you.
nite, --Senvaikis (talk) 21:22, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks. :) Patzilla777 (talk) 21:25, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

done. Let me know if that's what you expected. And I still haven't heard the reason, why such lowercasing is so important for these artists :) --Senvaikis (talk) 07:31, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

The reason is simply because these bands are well known like this, and the iTunes of both list them like this. So if the option's there, we might as well take it. 08:25, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
Whoops, forgot to sign in. Patzilla777 (talk) 08:28, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

1 artist, how many pages?!

Senv there is indeed reason to have a fit, and it is not Jeff, Sam or Cat. It's Renard. ES (talk) 12:56, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Oh yeah, - that's a wellknown pita, definite leader of multi-aliased artists. But I don't know almost nothing about him. Don't you think we should find someone who knows him better? --Senvaikis (talk) 13:08, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
P.S. Have you tried to evaluate, what part of his records are instrumentals?
Without looking I'd say over 90% of his output must be Instrumentals, like classical composers and Tangerine Dream :)) Should we be tightening up on what genre of music we accept? Should we even have stuff related to this franchise. And this? Ten years from now would any of that stuff be remembered by anybody?! ES (talk) 16:51, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
Let me treat you questions as purely rhetorical: there's no need to ask my opinion about all kind of "little ponies" after my not very polite refuse contributing to your "beloved" SSs ;). But LW isn't my personal site, - that's a product of collective efforts, and that's nice - all kind of musical, cultural, religious etc preferencies have their right to coexist here. Thus, being outside some culture, I'm just trying to minimize my contribution to this culture-related pages - just I'll never be good enough in that ;). But that's all - no dictate, admonitions or prohibitions, - untill LW policy's violated. So, I'd rather make some donkey work for FB and Die Toten Hosen, leaving all animation/comix-culture for someone else, who knows it better - from inside...
--Senvaikis (talk) 18:31, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
This discussion merits it's own page, imho. However you left the matter of artist with >1 pages untouched! If Cat's case has been divined, then D.Remmler's case shouldn't be too difficult. Prolific aliases is hardly a cultural matter. And just to be clear, SS has had the collaboration many many REAL artists, it has staying power and is a cultural landmark, non of that applied to pinky lil horsies. ES (talk) 22:03, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Merge Die Roten Rosen to Die Toten Hosen?

Hello again, I saw your discussion with ES about merging artists. I recently purged all other songs for the band Toten Hosen and they too have some aliases, with the most known beeing Die Roten Rosen. What do you think about merging them? If you could automate most of it I would like to do the remaining work, although I don't know yet what would even remain to do? Greetings, --Fassbrause (talk) 14:58, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

done, - now you may finish the remaining job (yes, page's not finished yet: reducing os, if possible, making singles blue, uploading covers etc). After that let me know, and Lwt will do the remaining donkey work for you: update songheaders with albums, add missing extlinks etc).
gl, --Senvaikis (talk) 16:52, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
done, Okay, you may have a look. OS gone, existing singles are blue + covers. What might still be missing are the bonus tracks of some albums. I think I will continue with that, because it might reduce the singles section (The album reissues contain mostly the b-sides of the singles).
Greetings, --Fassbrause (talk) 14:58, December 10, 2014 (UTC)
done, though not so much to be done has been left, as for such huge page - nice job!
Attaching b-sides would be nice indeed - that'd reduce enormous size of page. Btw, when you decide to remove some redundant single from artist page, - please, don't leave single pages orphaned - mark them for deletion. I found and deleted one such lonely page (Die Toten Hosen:The Guns Of Brixton (2006), - hope you don't mind.
And the last note: I'd recommend to refrain from one more type of redundancy - overusing additional notations to the tracks. They are good for remixes/live/acoustic etc versions, but not necessary for instrumentals or covers and completely inappropriate for providing info about composers or lyricist.
Thanks for a good job, and happy editing, --Senvaikis (talk) 11:12, December 11, 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Senv for the job! Could you give an example for your last note? I'm not quite sure what you mean, if notations regarding track listings at the artist/album pages or notations at the song pages itself Smile?
Greetings, --Fassbrause (talk) 14:13, December 11, 2014 (UTC)
Additional notation samples:
  • Redundant use: Take a look at tracklisting of Die Toten Hosen:Ballast Der Republik (2012) (on artist & album pages). Text "(Text: Johann Esser und Wolfgang Langhoff / Musik: Rudi Goguel)" , attached to track Die Moorsoldaten link, is definitelly a sample of misused notation imo - this info should be placed where it belongs to - in song page (using {{CreditBox}}, specially designed for that).
  • Misuse: If song with some lyrics have an instrumental version, the separate pages shoud be created for both versions (lw policy: essentially different lyrics - separate pages). That's why "Nur zu Besuch (Instrumental)" was changed into "Nur zu Besuch (Instrumental)"
hth, --Senvaikis (talk) 14:46, December 11, 2014 (UTC)
done - Thanks, now I see. I removed said notations & added credits to every song page of the bonus CD. In my defense I want to point out that I never added them in the first place there Tongue. I will keep in mind to create instrumental pages from now on, thanks for pointing it out.
What do I do when I create an album page for a single, which contains several remixes? In the beginning of my editing here I just kept separate links for every remix, which led to many red links. Later on, and I think after some of my edits were corrected, I just set the links for the remixes to the original version, turning everything to the beloved blue color. I don't have the intention to check every remix for lyrical differences. What to do?
Greetings, --Fassbrause (talk) 21:54, December 11, 2014 (UTC)

Norma Jean (US)

It seems that most of this band's songs still link back to the original Norma Jean as opposed to them. Patzilla777 (talk) 20:39, December 10, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for info - done, --Senvaikis (talk) 11:14, December 11, 2014 (UTC)

Chrono Malady

Senv, I found new type of fish! 安室奈美恵 (Namie Amuro) ES (talk) 20:13, December 11, 2014 (UTC)

Elaborate, please. --Senvaikis (talk) 20:53, December 11, 2014 (UTC)
The albums are listed in reverse chronological order. If there is a way of finding such beasts by Lwt...ES (talk) 23:16, December 11, 2014 (UTC)

Adding albums

Hi Senvaikis (I take this apart from the other discussion we're having on my page as it's a practical question).

Do I understand this right?

- I make a new album (just did Bohannon - Insides Out (1975))
- I publish it
- I add cover
- and then I DO NOT add this album on the artist's page? I used to do it, because otherwise it would be orphaned, But if Janitor does this automatically I understand I don't need to do it).

In this case (Bohannon): I did not publish it on the artist's page. Thanks! --Markcoutinho (talk) 13:20, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

No, that never was a Janitor's business - it will never add this album to the artist page. Janitor is a bot, dedicated to orphaned songs monitoring - it adds them to their artists pages' OS section and creates required pages for artists, if they are missing.
Even if Janitor were monitoring albums the same way as songs, I'd not recommend to leave such job for a bot (not a smartest one, should I say (sorry, Sean - we know that's not your fault) ) :).
--Senvaikis (talk) 15:43, December 12, 2014 (UTC)
Not that anything can ever be claimed to be 100% foolproof (because fools are so inventive) but the less error prone method of album creation for mere mortals has been: laying down the track listing on the artist page first, then clicking the redlinked album header on the artist page to create the album page; so that the album page is born attached to the artist page, without requiring gluing by any bot! Doing it the other way around, is, umm, rather inventive, and not proven to be a better practice.
Of course the inventive crowd are still laying album tracks on artist pages in reverse chrono order, even though it's a pretty big no no, and no bot has yet been trained to rectify it. ES (talk) 06:46, December 13, 2014 (UTC)
@ES:Please, try to refrain from expressions like "inventive crowd of fools", at least on my talk page. --Senvaikis (talk) 15:49, December 13, 2014 (UTC)
Google was broken? Idiot proof Wikipedia16 --ES (talk) 16:16, December 13, 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether I should take the 'fool'-thing personally, but I see your point, ES. It's a far better way of adding albums. Still - I see lots of albums that are wrongly capitalized (reason why I once in a while have to correct my 'album addings', because I copy the title from the artist's page), so if someone would start with the artist page and take it from there, the actual album-page will be wrongly capitalized too.

--Markcoutinho (talk) 18:22, December 15, 2014 (UTC)


Hey Senv,
looks like no admin is opposed to putting spotify in SongFooter (or cared enough to give input), while others asked why it isn't done already… So are you and Lwt ready to go through +730k pages and move id to sf? Just give me the word, and I'll merge it (along with allmusic search). — 6×9 (Talk) 15:45, December 13, 2014 (UTC)

If nobody complains for limited "marketplace" of some spots, we may start. I'll need a day for Lwt preparing.
Btw, does mentioning only SF mean we aren't going to "spotify" both AFs yet?--Senvaikis (talk) 16:06, December 13, 2014 (UTC)
I mentioned only sf because af.spotify hasn't come up yet… but I see no reason not to, once Lwt is through with songs. — 6×9 (Talk) 16:18, December 13, 2014 (UTC)

Blank page?

Hi Senvaikis. Yesterday you edited the page of Ex-Votos and asked me "please, no blank pages too". As far as I'm aware of the page wasn't blank. My guess is that the action EchoSierra did after my edit left this blank page. This was his edit: 17:29, December 13, 2014 (diff | hist) . . (0)‎ . . m Ex-Votos:Subtilezas Porno-Populares ‎ (EchoSierra moved page Ex-Votos: Subtilizas Porno-Populares to Ex-Votos:Subtilezas Porno-Populares without leaving a redirect)

I just filled this site with info as the original poster of the song of this group did not create this page. I just wanted to be helpful. --Markcoutinho (talk) 06:00, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

The link would have been red before the move as well, because you put "Subtilizas" while the actual page has "Subtilezas"… But don't worry too much about it, just a simple misunderstanding that was easily cleared up.
BTW, you don't have to put {{clear}} under every section; it's only useful if there are floating items about, usually {{Album Art}}. — 6×9 (Talk) 08:34, December 14, 2014 (UTC)
I won't worry about it. But I just copy/pasted the title from the original lyrics page, created by Dindor Correseca. So that's the origin of this 'problem'.

Take care! :-) --Markcoutinho (talk) 09:05, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

Is This Allowed?

STAR☆ANIS. I didn't know that sth like this was even possible ...  · Lichtweber talk service 

Like what...? --Senvaikis (talk) 21:18, December 15, 2014 (UTC)
The star symbol in the page name. Is it legit or does the artist page have to be moved?  · Lichtweber talk service 
Full list: Dj TAKA Vs Ryu☆Muramasa☆STAR☆ANIS片手☆Size --Senvaikis (talk) 21:23, December 15, 2014 (UTC)
P.S. (forgot to answer): truth to tell, Muramasa☆ is much better, compared to *NSYNC imo :).

Improving Communication

This is not a misunderstanding. But it might indicate a lack of information. So why don't you disclose to me on which grounds you consider wrong native capitalisation an "insufficient reason for edit request". As said in my edit note, the docs do not specify reasons, afaik. Thanks in advance,  · Lichtweber talk service  15:28, December 19, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's not misunderstanding. That's a violation of one of the basic rules in LW - "no edit wars". Just don't know what else I may comment here.
Now about your question - why not following particular language capitalization isn't sufficient reason for {{Edit}} request (why not to ask that before rereverting?).
  1. first of all - that's more recommendation than policy, as well as using MB set of rules. Should I mention that mb rules differs from wp(s), and LW doesn't have its own set of rules?
  2. I asked you to follow your sobriety for the next reason: have you tried to evaluate, how many such requests should you place on our pages? Take it easy, but that'd take decades for you, making several edits per day. And even when you finally succeeded, the result would be piteous - you'd make Category:Requests For Edits absolutely senseless.
  3. That's one is not so important, - more curiosity - were you going to place ER on all pages with some probs, while they are "in a process of heavy editing"?
--Senvaikis (talk) 17:23, December 19, 2014 (UTC)
  1. I know that. And I think we should change it and make mb's rules our rules. We already do follow them, so why not adopt them?
  2. I most certainly wouldn't want to flag all possible pages. I'm not a bot.
  3. The purpose of this edit was to inform editors that it is possible and appreciated to format dispay text in a way that follows native capitalisation rules. Especially French editors often seem not to know about that. And I do know that LW:PN hurts the eyes of many French (and not only them). Mind: There's a French LW. Ever wondered why that is?
My approach is to communicate with editors not only one-by-one, but also by using badges on selected pages. This way I hope to reach more than one user, and "spread the word". I'd think that this is in our mutual interest.
Now, if you have another approach, please share it. Otherwise I'd like to re-label the page.
 · Lichtweber talk service  19:21, December 28, 2014 (UTC)
Reading all your 3 answers I can't get rid of the impression, that you just refuse to hear what I'm talking about. That's my last attempt to repeat the same, in hope to be heard finally.
  1. We've been talking about that already - #1-rule is to follow policy. If you wanna change something - initiate the change of policy, and follow #1 rule again. But for a while - mb rules aren't a policy.
  2. Exactly. You aren't a bot (and that's good). But you are admin. Every your edition should serve as an example, how things must be done on LW. But this your edit by no means isn't an example to be followed. Let's leave alone the war-style of rerevert. This your "approach" just shouldn't be followed for another reason, - it would inevitably lead to overcrowding of Category:Requests For Edits, making it absolutely senseless.
  3. one more example of pseudo-answering: the #3 was not about your purposes. That was just suggestion to refrain from any ER-type banners exactly for the reason of page being "in a process of heavy editing".
Yes, sometimes I don't understand something (French LW) too. But then I just admit that and ask: "sorry, didn't understand, could you please explain?" :)
--Senvaikis (talk) 22:51, December 28, 2014 (UTC)
Based on your remarks, I get the impression that you're not at all interested in discussing the merits (i.e. comunication with users), but rather in technicalities. (BTW: Just so you know: I understand your concerns about C:RFE getting flooded. So no worries: I won't put the badge there again.)
So be it, let's do that:
I (implicitly) tried two times (in my edit comment and in my initial post) to get the information, based on which of our policies you reverted my edit. Since you refrained from giving me this information so far, I now for the third time politely (and this time explicitly) ask you: Please give me a link to a policy page that substantiates your opinion that cap was an "insufficient reason for edit request".
And since you never failed to mention violations in your recent communication with me: How about LW:AGF? Cheers  · Lichtweber talk service  20:09, December 29, 2014 (UTC)
That's no longer funny - I'm getting really tired from your "improved communication", but luckily AGF was recalled very timely: in addition to other useful recommendations how to "prevent problems from escalating" it contains one more wise advice to you - please, follow it and "call in a third party" - I'm sure 6 will cope with that, once again. --Senvaikis (talk) 22:12, December 29, 2014 (UTC)
Did someone mention my namenumber? All right, let's try to clear things up…
  • {{edit}} is a request to any passing user to fix something that you don't have the knowledge/time/motivation to fix yourself. It has nothing to do with whether the page is currently being edited or has been sitting there for years.
  • For something to be fixed it needs to be broken; MB cap guidelines aren't LW policy, so pages not following them shouldn't be flagged with tl:edit.
  • If they were policy, tl:edit would have been justified (but not flagging all such pages; seems we all agree on that).
  • Regardless of all of the above, knowingly reverting an admin's reversion should always be avoided. Instead, discuss the matter on their talk page first.
Hope that helped and not just made you both angry at me instead of each other :-) Now I'm off to give {{edit}} some long-needed documentation. — 6×9 (Talk) 12:09, December 31, 2014 (UTC)

Purple Star removal? I'm confused

Hello :)

Soo yesterday you removed the Purple Star from one of the song pages I've done the last days (here), and I can't seem to figure out why. The Help page on ranking says "Usually, these revolve around non-English languages and non-Latin alphabets and the unique challenges they present.", which is true for this page (the 5 Japanese lines at the bottom). I've also included the {{Code Purple}} template on the talk page (as the help suggested). Sooo yeah, I'm confused :D Are the Japanese lines not supposed to be translated? Is there some rule to not translate different languages in a song? I'm not quite used to "multi language songs" so not sure how to handle it. Aside of this, shouldn't the star be at least silver since all the requirements are met? Only the Japanese lines are missing so far.

Clarification would be welcome, thanks in advance :) --Mihawk90 (talk) 17:56, December 28, 2014 (UTC)

Hi, hawk
please take one more look at the subject of your msg and then try to find a mentioned "Purple Star" in LW:Page Ranking Help. Haven't found it? Nothing strange - such "star" just doesn't exist in our pageranking system. That's why it has been simply reverted to a valid value, taken from previous revision. Sure, this page deserves a higher rating, and you are free to do that :)
--Senvaikis (talk) 19:09, December 28, 2014 (UTC)
Oohh darn... It's Violet not purple, how did I come up with that... I have no idea :D Thanks, would have been nice if the edit message said that though ;) Aside of that, was the Violet star the right one and the {{Code Purple}} on the talk page correct? I got a little confused when I saw that all the pages in Category:Requests For Translation/Japanese (I can't link it cause the Link disappears for some reason o.O take a look at changes in edit mode (Senv's remark)) linked to the song page and not to the talk pages. Should I use another additional template on the song page as well? --Mihawk90 (talk) 00:12, December 29, 2014 (UTC)
Should confess I'm not a big expert in Jp-related stuff, so please treat my answer just as my humble opinion, not any kind of mandatory instruction :). I may be wrong, but I'd not use neither {{Code Purple}} nor {{RequestTranslation}} on this page. Both are designed to mark entire pages, requiring translations. Your page contains only a small Japanese fragment, which you may want to translate. But according to lw policy, song lyrics should be written "as sung", without any translations on the same lyrics page - they should be placed on according language subpage (/en, /ja, /roman etc). If this jp-text fragment contains some essential text, remarkably different from remaining (en) text, then such translation is desirable indeed and according subpage should be created for it then. While this problem remains unsolved, your page may be ranked maximal as "bronze" only. Otherwise it could be ranked silver or even gold, if you (page certifyer) wish...
Happy editing, and HNY! --Senvaikis (talk) 07:28, December 29, 2014 (UTC)
Mh yeah that's somewhat what I thought as well. The problem being that I don't know the meaning until I see a translation, but as far as I can understand the "not so great" google translation it doesn't seem to be essential to the lyrics, and in the recording it also sounds like some kind of radio broadcast or similar. I guess I am going to remove the Google translation on the song page in either case? I mean it's wrong/bad and translations shouldn't be on song pages anyway, as you said. That being said (and done) the page should be ready for Gold (I think even the album). Thanks for the advice so far and happy new year! --Mihawk90 (talk) 09:19, December 29, 2014 (UTC)
Community content is available under Copyright unless otherwise noted.