Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Songs
Get Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Songs essential facts below, , or join the Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Songs discussion. Add Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Songs to your topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Songs
WikiProject Songs (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the quality scale.

August Rigo link please

Hello, can we link August Rigo to his resource page? He wrote this song as well as the new song Tough Love on Chris Brown's Heartbreak on a Full Moon album.

Chart or Commercial performance

I'm not sure I'm posting this in the right place. But I have come across several articles on resource which are GA's and FA's, some of them I edited/reviewed or nominated that show these slight difference. I would like to know if one of the aforementioned usages is more correct than the other and if so why OR is exactly the same thing?

Thank you. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:49, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

I had always thought that "Charts" would contain the chart themselves, while the "commercial performance" seemed to consist of prose covering similar content, but also things not covetable by charts alone. (ie The song was on the chart for six weeks, sold x amount, was a musicians fifth song to top the chart, or that a song dethroned another big song from a chart, etc etc.) This is just based around observations though, I could be wrong. Sergecross73 msg me 20:55, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick response. That seems the most logical way for me as well. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:11, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Endless Night (song) FAC

Hello everyone. I would greatly appreciate any feedback on my current FAC about a song from The Lion King (musical) if possible. I hope that everyone has a great rest of their day and/or night! Aoba47 (talk) 03:27, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Definition of a single

What's the definition of a single? Is it an individual song released to digital media? Is it a song that is released to radio? Something else? This editor is of the opinion that if is sold as a song in the iTunes Store, it's a single, I tend to lean toward a more traditional view. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:19, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Both can be classified as a single. There is such thing as a digital single, and iTunes is the best example. I am of the belief that the definition of "single" in the music industry is loosening. Thanks for opening this, though, let's see what everyone says. Mind if I bring attention to WP:ALBUM? They would almost certainly have a relevant opinion. dannymusiceditor oops 18:43, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
I know they both can be classified as one, but is it correct to say that it is. Some people also call a van a car, but is that correct use? There has been discussion here before that argues against a liberal use of the term. I'm just gauging if that's still the case or if we've given up on it and there's a new consensus. And, yes, ALBUM might have something to say as well. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:57, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
The definition seems to fluctuate in this modern age of digital downloads and music streaming. Personally, I'm of the mindset of just going by what sources commonly say. If reliable sources commonly call it a single, we call it a single. If they don't, just call it a "promotional song" or "a song that was released ahead of an album's release" or something. I think my stance is the most commonly done one, as it's in-line with how resource functions. But I don't believe there's a hard consensus on it either. Sergecross73 msg me 19:53, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
I like that definition, so with iTunes calling it a single, I suppose it's a step. We just need another. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
It should be noted that iTunes calls every 1-2 track release a single. 3+ are an EP and then after some indeterminate point after that (possibly duration?) they drop the labels altogether and presumably just consider it an album. -- I need a name (talk) 20:58, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I use iTunes as a reference point, but not as a sole-decider either. I prefer to find some WP:RSMUSIC-type sources on the matter too. Many websites dedicate an article to a song upon its first release, and another one when a music video is released (if its not the same day.) Those sources commonly define them as "single" or "random song". Sergecross73 msg me 21:02, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Makes sense. I can live with that. dannymusiceditor oops 00:01, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguating a song title that already has parentheses

What's the standard practice? Is it "Foo (Bar) (song)" or is it something less awkward? Similarly, would the song be listed at "Foo (disambiguation)" or would it be considered a partial title match? I'm sure this has been discussed somewhere before but I couldn't find it. —Xezbeth (talk) 09:54, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Do you have a particular song in mind that actually needs this kind of disambiguation? --Izno (talk) 13:45, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
I thought I found one the other day which prompted this question, but now I can't find it. If they're that rare then it answers my question anyway, I'll just have to improvise if I find one. —Xezbeth (talk) 17:07, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure it really happens much, because song names like that are often bizarre and one-of-a-kind names that dont require disambiguation at all. Sergecross73 msg me 14:56, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Con te partirò or Time to Say Goodbye

A discussion regarding which title form is more appropriate at Talk:Con te partirò#Requested move 25 September 2018 may be of interest.    Roman Spinner (talk o contribs) 07:38, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I would like to revisit our "covers" policy

but would first like to read the discussions that took place when the current policy was adopted. There is a ton of archives here, can anyone point me to a good starting place? thanks, Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:24, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Do you mean WP:COVERSONG? The addition of it happened 2011-10-02T09:12:39 (UTC) with a comment of "add cover-versions per talk". So checking the archives I found Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs/Archive 8#Cover Versions. The editors involved in that discussion appear to be generally retired. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:35, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Richhoncho is certainly still active on Wikipedia. Personally I believe that a cover version should pass WP:GNG and have been discussed in reliable sources itself in order to be included. Richard3120 (talk) 20:32, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
I though Richhoncho's was still active and my quick check had the dates for his contributions backward. My mistake. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:55, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes I am active sometimes. I did look for the original discussion but failed to find it - it was a RFC and may have been separate to WPSongs. It was based on that a song should not have two articles for different performances. SONGCOVER was written accordingly and, as far as I am concerned, was widened to include song covers of that performance, many 'additional recordings' were then trimmed (some I did myself). I think it best Einar says what he doesn't like and we can work from there. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:59, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Well what I am wanting to do is to change the policy on song articles to read that it is okay to list all versions of the song that are recorded by blue link artists. One of the things that makes a song notable is how many times it gets recorded and who covered it. (Here I am using the word "cover" to mean any recorded version of a song after the original. I know that there are other meanings to that word). I was recently at an article where all the covers except the ones that charted had been removed and so it made the song seem as if it had be recorded four (or whatever) times instead of forty (ditto). This is a lot of useful information for some people that has just been whacked out. So what I don't like is that I can't go to an article and see who covered it, maybe when and where, and/or how many times it has been covered. What about songs that have been recorded 200 times? Well you use five or six columns and do it. Carptrash (talk) 01:15, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
You have to be careful to address the difference between a song that has been covered a few times and one that has been covered many, many times. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:33, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
How so ?@Walter Görlitz: I'd like to be able to include all covers that any editors find to be notable. The song already has an article, so it is notable, I say only include covers by notable artists, so, double notable. The song that I saw and mentioned above (no link, but there could be one) went from being asong with many covers to one with a few and no mention was made of the other versions. Carptrash (talk) 04:10, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Please don't ping me. This talk page is on my watchlist.
Do you mean like the several dozen covers of "Imagine" some of which are listed at
Do you mean the hundreds of times "Silent Night", "White Christmas" and other Christmas songs are covered each year? No, we don't need to have a record of this. Even if we restricted those to blue link albums, not just artists, we would have ridiculously long lists of non-notable recordings.
The same goes for the songs the various American Songbooks (Jazz standards). So if you want to narrow your definition, you might succeed in affecting a change. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:19, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
<edit conflict>I share your concerns, Carptrash, about the wholesale removal of cover versions based on lack of hit single status. Because, yes, a song's popularity among other recording artists is often testament to its enduring quality and therefore its notability. I've seen mention of a cover removed even though it features a guest appearance by the song's composer, for instance - I would have thought that automatically makes the cover notable and worthy of inclusion. Admittedly, though, it's often the case that a previous editor hasn't supplied a source that highlights the cover's significance.
I'm not sure if the policy wording needs to be changed, as such. My impression (and I've seen some editors citing this when reinstating mention of some of the cover versions) is that the policy is being incorrectly applied: it's being cited as a rationale for removing information that it actually does allow for. I don't mean for every blue-linked artist that has recorded the song - I think that might be over the top - but certainly for a particularly well-known artist. JG66 (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
A song is notable most often because it becomes a hit and it is that rendition which is notable and for which we create articles. If that song had never been a hit but had been covered on an album by a notable artist we would not create an article. These lists of covers often hang down from the bottom of articles, unsourced, no context and just sit there showing a notable artist sang it on stage, on an album or failed to chart with it. Imagine that with the 2000+ versions of Yesterday! All-in-all they have little or no encyclopaedic value other than for people to include their favourite artist. Allowing long rambling lists means the effective deletion of WP:SONGCOVER.--Egghead06 (talk) 05:19, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
I have very slowly learned when to back out of a discussion and this is one of those. Because my world seems to be different from others. I'd love to see a list of 2,000 versions of "Yesterday." Because that tells me something about the song that nothing else does. Sorry about pinging you Walter, I always appreciate it when someone pings me, I have a lot of articles on my watchlist and sometimes miss things. But then, as noted, we are different. Viva la difference! Carptrash (talk) 05:42, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Interesting point here, yes, it is notable there are 100 or 200 recordings by different artists of a song, but not who those 100/200 artists were, but I rarely see such figures. Whereas, artists who cover 'Silent Night' and 'White Christmas' are those making Xmas albums. Not in the least notable (and already covered by category!). --Richhoncho (talk) 10:50, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

I guess the cruz of the matter is whether the existence of a recording of someone elses' version of a song is notable on its own. I've previously seen users say that "X artist covering "Y" song is notable because it was on the Radio 1 Live Lounge. Here is the BBC link to that cover." Whereas I think the policy reads it has to receive coverage beyond its existence e.g. someone reviewing the cover etc. -> Lil-?niqu? 1 - { Talk } - 11:54, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Lists of songs

Hello. I have few issues related to lists of songs. Some issues which come to my mind when I look at featured lists of songs and I think about strict sourcing (I'm not sure how you call it, I mean references). Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

  1. Let's assume one version of any language album includes same songs but few of them just has english titles. No one mentions it's the same song just with english title (no information in booklet, no articles about it, information not provided in stores like iTunes etc.). Can I say it's the same song just with english title in notes (WP:OR)? Eventually should I add both as separate entry? Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  2. Sometimes it's obvious that it's the same song even it has different or translated title and different instrumental. How to classify it? Should I add both as separate entry or eventually just add information about second song in notes (WP:OR)? Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  3. Sometimes it looks obvious that one not common song from album is in Spanish or both languages but sources not mention it (it can be Mexican Spanish. Can it be?). Can I mark this song with something like "Spanish/mixed language" note (WP:OR)? Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  4. Should I include official remixes of other artists songs? Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  5. Should I include songs written for other artists? Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  6. Many featured lists has references directly to albums. Not needed to add additional (easly avaiable) references to AllMusic or atleast Discogs (often includes needed images of albums)? Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
     Done Eurohunter (talk) 22:06, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  7. Are sources like iTunes, Deezer, Junodownload and other online shops reliable for informations about release? Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  8. Is there way to obtain digital booklet without purchase? Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  9. Should I add unreleased songs (demo songs, live performances) which are not mentioned in any source but are unoficialy avaiable on YouTube? Eurohunter (talk) 11:10, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
     Done Eurohunter (talk) 18:29, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  10. Songs legend. Why some songs are marked both with colour and sign instead one of those? Eurohunter (talk) 11:12, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  11. If I have no access to some releases should I mark some data as "Unknown" (means not avaiable in the source and probably can't be completed?) or left it empty (means it can be avaiable in the source but author has no access to it?). Eurohunter (talk) 11:14, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  12. Some lists are sourced with locked status at MetroLyrics (Musixmatch). Locked status makes lyrics has been veryfied by Musixmatch stuff and no more avaiable to edit by any MetroLyrics user? Eurohunter (talk) 11:23, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
     Done Eurohunter (talk) 18:29, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  13. It isn't needed to define songs as "single" (these which was released as single)? Some lists mention it some not. Eurohunter (talk) 12:58, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
  14. "Song" isn't correct term for instrumental music. Should I define which work is song and which is instrumental (sources doesn't mention it)? It's next issue where border is thin. Eurohunter (talk) 13:01, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
You can use the professional organisations, ASCAP, BMI, SOCAN and others (not all give the public the right to search repertoire, but those that do are useful). If the songwriters are the same song. One different *may* signify a new lyricist. Here's the link to BMI to give you a start. --Richhoncho (talk) 11:24, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Is this answer reffers to MetroLyrics? I mean MetroLyrics is used to recognise langauge based on text (I guess). I know ASCAP and BMI (I'm going to check SOCAN now. Do you know more?) Here is next issue. There are covers written by discussed artists without "performer" parameter so you need to relalise by title and easiest check it on YouTube. There is many unknown entries which I don't know are these covers, expected new song (?) or something other. The other related issue is If I know know the song from YouTube I will know thats it ASCAP but someone other may not know guessing based only on ASCAP. Simply saying we don't know what ACAP contents before we check it on YouTube (I put here YouTube as one of ways). Eurohunter (talk)
Btw. BMI does not distinguish beetwen songwritter and composer (the same meaning?). Eurohunter (talk) 12:06, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
I prefer the horse's mouth, so those I listed are good for me, Metrolyrics is OK when it's an approved lyric (not all are). If you want to find other official sources each country has a 'Performing Rights Organisation' - whether you can search the database is another matter. The lists are for royalty checks so no further details are required or shown. I wouldn't trust YouTube for anything. --Richhoncho (talk) 12:24, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Songs uploaded to YouTube by users are untrustable (unlike official channels) but in this way we know some songs exists (especially live performances, often the problem is how to verify title). Btw. how to prove YouTube channel is official if doesn't have verify badge but is linked on official website of artist/institution (someone could say that website is false too). Eurohunter (talk) 13:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
@Richhoncho: Do you know if I can expect answers here any soon? Probably my expectactions are too big but I kinda don't know what to do now. Eurohunter (talk) 18:29, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

  This article uses material from the Wikipedia page available here. It is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike License 3.0.



Music Scenes