Help talk:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs

From LyricWiki

[edit] Repetitive Songs / Repeated choruses

The formatting of repetitive songs just jumped in my mind - things like Du Hast. Do we want to go with using x5s sort-of-thing, or have everything written out? Casualsax 20:26, 19 April 2006 (PDT)

Here's another question for ya! :P Is there any standard yet for how to type out repeated choruses? – Reverend Duck 09:08, 9 August 2006 (PDT)

I've taken the liberty to move your post to this question, since I think they are quite same, if you disagree feel free to correct me. Immeëmosol 00:37, 24 August 2006 (PDT)

I personally think it should be discouraged unless the lyrics are identical. If that's the case, here's how I'd do it: I'd place a [Chorus] or [Bridge] on top of the section that repeats later in the song (MODE A). And the place a [Repeat Chorus] or [Repeat Bridge x2] in each repeated instance. If a section repeats itself each time (MODE B), I'd say add a [x2] to the end of the last line. However, I feel there need to be some guidelines to keep users from submitting "Yeah [x16]" or something of the like. As a repeat code such as that can cut down on clutter and make it easier that way, it's not easier if the reader has to count on their fingers where they are. There, of course, is the "label everything" method I use on my personal lyric ID3 tags, and as I've done here on Crush 40's eponymous debut, but that's just flat-out meticulous, too many songs break traditional form for that, and I don't expect it to be useful to most. I've had to make more exceptions for songs than formula-fill-outs. But as far as my previously stated ideas, here are some proposed guidelines:

1. Repeated text (MODES A & B) must be at least six lines. Otherwise, it just doesn't strike me as all that much of a bother.

2. Number of repetitions of a section (MODE B) must be a single digit.

3. If there is any variation at all, just forget these silly repeat tags and write each instance out including the changes. We do have Copy/Paste, after all.

I realize that my previously posted C40 lyrics are all incorrect under these methods. Only reason I've kept them that way is it turns out that's how the band has been known to do their lyrics, so it seemed to make sense. I'll fix them once we agree on something here. DackAttac 22:15, 26 February 2007 (EST)

Actually, another administrator and I have recently discussed a situation similar to this. Our preference (meaning it's not set in stone, and I'm guessing won't ever be) is that the only things that should be inside of the <lyric> tags is what is sung or vocalized...anything else should be left out unless absolutely necessary.

Now, I understand that some songs go into a handful of the same chorus at the end of the song or some such incredibly tedious repetition that would look quite a bit outrageous if they were just copied-and-pasted into infinity, and so a "(Repeat until end)" notation or something like "(Repeat 3 times)" would be perfectly understandable. Some times it may be important to know who is singing or speaking a particular verse (generally in rap songs), and I can understand adding a notation for this as well, as it adds information that may be important to understanding the song lyrics.

That being said, the Chorus, Bridge, Instrumental, Repeat Chorus, Pre-Chorus, etc. that are found on some song pages, such as in the Crush 40:Live and Learn link, actually make the lyrics more difficult to decipher. What is gained from such notation besides the chorus not being repeated once? Not much. The simplest the page can be, the better.

--Kiefer <img src="/images/5/58/KieferE.jpg" alt="Esperanza" /> <img src="/images/f/f9/KieferTalk.jpg" alt="Talk!" /> 22:59, 26 February 2007 (EST)

I'm completely against things like [Chorus] and [Repeat 5x] and such. This being a high-quality database, I'd say that the lyrics should be written full out as sung, no matter what. Especially since LyricWiki has it's own API - of people import lyrics into their music player, I think they expect it to be shown exactly as sung. I, for example, use the lyrics here and synchronize them. This means that everything that's not written full out must be written full out by me manually before syncing. --MiSP 08:25, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

I'm against adding notes on lyrics but I also don't think that vocalizations or repetitions have a place outside karaoke. --Casper 17:04, 10 October 2007 (EDT)

[edit] Amazon Album Link

In template, an album link to Amazon is defined but in pages the link points to songs. Which one is preferred? Stradicaster 14:22, 13 May 2006

[edit] Instrumental Songs

What must be written in instrumental songs? I choose writing only "[Instrumental]". Stradicaster 14:22, 13 May 2006

Use the template {{Instrumental}} --Frontway 05:03, 13 May 2006 (PDT)

Is necessary that the instrumental songs have a page? Tae 18:12, 27 August 2006 (PDT)

I don't know what is preferred. Personally I don't make a page for instrumental songs, but I don't know about the others here.

- Teknomunk 21:05, 27 August 2006 (PDT)

My opinion on this is that it is better to have the instrumental pages whenever possible since people may hear of a song title and look for it on the site (or through a webservice). If the page exists as an instrumental, they know that the song does not have lyrics instead of just getting no result.

-Sean Colombo 23:02, 27 August 2006 (PDT)

Fully and completely agree at the above. If a song is instrumental, people should be able to find out. --MiSP 08:26, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

But do they still really need a separate page containing nothing but a note on being instrumental? Shouldn't a redirect + a note in the album's entry suffice? If you're browsing the discography of an artist who has done several instrumentals, it's annoying to comb thru 100 cases of "This song is an instrumental". Plus, it makes LyricWiki resemble those annoying lyrics sites that put up entries for every song they can find in another music database somewhere just to attract hits, whether or not they have any lyrics for it. --Tropylium 12:18, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notes and trivia

I think there should be a note/reference feature like that in Wikipedia, so you can add clarifications and trivia to a song in a clear and easy manner. Is there anything like this already? – Reverend Duck 05:22, 9 August 2006 (PDT)

Are you referring to Cite.php and Footnotes? I have a feeling the lyric tags would stop that from working, but I should easily be able to fix that if it does. I'm 50/50 on whether we should use something like this. I have nothing against adding interpretations to songs, but without distracting the reader from the song lyrics. Very often "meanings" are personal meanings, and there will be several interpretations. These should be added at a section below the lyrics. Perhaps we could add line numbers to lyrics and refer via those.

I'm still undecided on the issue. Any suggestions?

--TrevorP 05:53, 9 August 2006 (PDT)

Well, as for the technical issue, I remain neutral. I still think the feature should be available, though. Let me give you some examples and you can tell me whether they warrant a footnote or not:

1. In the Red Hot Chili Peppers song Tell Me Baby, one word was changed in the music video to say "kitty" instead of "shitty." In my opinion, a footnote pointing this out would be helpful.
2. In a different RHCP song, one line reads, "Get the message on Flea's fist," to which could be added a footnote explaining what that message is. (He has the letters L, O, V, and E tatooed on it.) Granted, this could detract from simplicity quite a bit without helping a lot, especially if footnotes started to fill up in some articles.

Anyway, I'd like your opinion on these two examples. Thanks in advance. By the way, this LyricWiki is a great project, and something I've been looking for for a while now. Good job so far! – Reverend Duck 08:23, 9 August 2006 (PDT)

[edit] <lyrics> tag or spaces before every line?

Which format is considered the standard one? Using the <lyrics> and </lyrics> tags, or putting a space in front of every line? The former is way easier for editing purposes. – Reverend Duck 05:44, 9 August 2006 (PDT)

The <lyrics> tags is the newer method. One day all the old songs might be reformatted using a bot, but for now, when posting or editing songs, the <lyrics> are preferred.

--TrevorP 05:56, 9 August 2006 (PDT)

How was the lyrics tag implemented? Do you use it just put a "simulated" space before each line and a yellow background. Curious, --Rajah 08:15, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

[edit] Templates and examples

I hope you like what I am working on right now 'cause I'm putting more time in it then I first thought I would. N.P. though... (Just fishing for a tiny bit of praise) Immeëmosol

[edit] Songs with several parts

(For example A Change Of Seasons) How had to be format? I thought in:

==Part One== <lyrics></lyrics> ==Part Two== <lyrics></lyrics> ==Etc.== <lyrics></lyrics>

Other idea? Tae 18:35, 27 August 2006 (PDT)

I would think that it should be as close to what is in the CD booklet as possible. If the song is divided into sections in the booklet, then I think that what you put would be fine.

- Teknomunk 21:05, 27 August 2006 (PDT)

Ugh... The CD booklets do not always contain correct lyrics. We should stick to what we hear, not what is written in a booklet, shouldn't we? The Other Saluton 02:45, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

Thats the wat I have been formatting song sections (see POS:Dea Pecuniae). I don't see that there would be a better way of doing it.

--TrevorP 15:33, 28 August 2006 (PDT)

[edit] Songs with characters

In many songs every verse is play by a fictitious character, like in Day Three: Pain. How is necessary to represent this? Or it is not necessary? Tae 18:35, 27 August 2006 (PDT)

As far as I know, there has been no discussion on this. I would think that what is in that song would be fine as long as it is accurate. As far as that particular song is concerned, I think it is fine. However, I am not familiar with the song.

- Teknomunk 21:05, 27 August 2006 (PDT)

This is an issuse I have come across before, and one I plan to resolve using the Lyric Plugin. Its an issue I have had to deal with in several songs in POS:Be.

For now I would probably format voices like this:

Send "Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs" Ringtone to your Cell Phone

Send "Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs" Ringtone to your Cell Phone

Voices should now be fairly easy to add in the development version of the plugin, however there are a few other changes that need to be made to make things easier to use before it can be released. Unfortunately I dont have the time at the moment to continue development. I should be able to push the next version out by the end of year.

--TrevorP 15:48, 28 August 2006 (PDT)

[edit] Still on songs with several parts

Is there a way to list the instrumental along with the songs, as in this example from the first Sabbath album.

Wasp/Behind The Wall Of Sleep/Basically/N.I.B.

I tried listing the instrumentals as such, and then used the lyric tag for the other songs, but it does not show up in Amarok that way. If I remove the instrumental tags and only use the lyric tag, I have no problem. Also I tried to use the song footer to label each section of the song as per each part, but I don't know how that would work.I just kinda fudged it for now and used the song footer for the whole song.

Dako 11:20, 21 October 2006 (PDT)

[edit] Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs/Japanese

As mention on the Formatting Artists Talk page, there is a stub at Help:Contents/Editing/Formatting/Songs/Japanese. Where and how should that be integrated/linked into this article?

[edit] Ambiguous/Disputed lyrics?

Not every artist out there supplies us with lyric booklets (and even those that do aren't always that cautious in making sure it matches exactly what they sing.) Which means that there are some lyrics out there just aren't 100% certain, yet.

The way I see it, there are three options.

1) Put up the lyrics with a best guess implemented, put in brackets with set of three question marks to flag uncertainty.

Example:

2) Leave that guess in without flagging it

Example:

3) Don't even guess. Leave it blank.

Example:

I personally want to lean towards #1, since this is a Wiki, it would really help highlight what needs help without the lyrics looking like Swiss cheese. But it'd be nice to reach some general consensus, since patching up errors in lyrics is kind of the genius to having a Lyric Wiki site. DackAttac 18:45, 16 July 2007 (EDT)

I'd just leave in the guess, as in option #1. Possibly, you can mark the page with an {{edit}} or {{uol}} flag. --Mischko <img src="/images/3/31/Talkicon.png" alt="Talk to me" /> <img src="/images/1/1e/EsperanzaIcon.png" alt="Esperanza Member" /> 08:34, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

[edit] Live versions?

Is there a standard naming convention for live versions of songs? Lucifer Sam 21:00, 20 July 2007 (EDT)

Or, for that matter, different studio versions by the same band?Lucifer Sam 21:15, 20 July 2007 (EDT)

It doesn't appear there is. I'd just go with Artist_McArtist:The_Song_Title_(2007) to keep with convention or Artist_McArtist:The_Song_Title_(Live). But before making an entirely new page for a live version, I'd only do it if some major changes were made; not just "Sing along if you know the words", "Thank you so much, Atlanta" or a few extra "yeah yeah yeah"s in the interludes. But entirely new passages in the song are worthwhile (even if spoken). Although listen to me mouth off like I own the place, those are just my two cents, and what I personally do. Any other views on the matter are encouraged. DackAttac 17:25, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

Note that Artist_McArtist:The_Song_Title_(2007) is the format reserved for album names. Watch out that the song is not the title song from an album, as it may cause confusion. Alternatively, you can put the different versions on the same page in different sections, or if the differences are small add them in the lyrics:

As DackAttac said, there is not really a fixed format. Just do what seems right. --Mischko <img src="/images/3/31/Talkicon.png" alt="Talk to me" /> <img src="/images/1/1e/EsperanzaIcon.png" alt="Esperanza Member" /> 09:37, 9 August 2007 (EDT)

I totally neglected to consider what would happen with a title track, though, so good call. This is my stab at making a dual-version page. Is there a way to fix the link from the later album to go directly to its version? I'm a little bit rusty with Wiki code. DackAttac 18:25, 10 August 2007 (EDT)

A possible solution would be to have an approach similar to lyrics in various languages - take a look at Vangelis' song Deliverance. Instead of Latin and English, we could have Original and Live. This way, a single song page could hold lyrics for many different versions of the song. However, when it comes to different studio versions, I have made different pages, such as Song Name and Song Name (Extended Bass Edit). Since LyricWiki has an API and all, I would deem it important that < lyric > tags contain only lyrics. --MiSP 08:33, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

[edit] Spoken parts?

A lot of songs have spoken areas before a song starts, after it ends, or even sometimes during an interlude. Is there a way to denote that these parts are spoken instead of sung with rhythm? I've been using quotation marks, as they're often conversations, but conversations can be lyrical and sung, too. I've seen it done with parenthesis, but parenthesis are also used for backup vocals with different parts.

Any suggestions? (I'd rather not just type out "Spoken". That seems a little disruptive.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DackAttac (talk • contribs) .

There really isn't a set way to do it. My opinions: Adding a line stating "Spoken:" before the section is fine. No notation at all would be fine, too, really. Usually the person looking at the lyrics has heard the music and they know that the lyrics at that point are spoken. If you wanted to be the most inconspicuous, you could always italicize the spoken section and have a footnote beneath the lyrics that the italics indicate a spoken part. That's the best solution I can think of, but once again, it isn't written in stone. ----Kiefer <img src="/images/5/58/KieferE.jpg" alt="Esperanza" /> <img src="/images/f/f9/KieferTalk.jpg" alt="Talk!" /> 23:49, 30 August 2007 (EDT)

I'd go with the latter (italizicing and adding note at the bottom). Seems the least disruptive way to do it, and the < lyrics > only contain lyrics. --MiSP 08:35, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

[edit] Concerning formatting of lyrics

There's a few points at the help page I want to discuss:

* The first letter in each line of lyrics is capitalized
* Use minimal end-of-line punctuation

The thing is that some bands and artists go to great lengths to ensure that the lyrics included are of high quality, and follow proper English punctuation and capitalization rules. Also, quite a lot of lyrics tell stories (e.g. poems that someone wrote a melody for), and the poems could originally have proper punctuation and capitalization. Also, quite a few song with Norwegian lyrics looks rather weird if not written properly with question marks, exclamation marks and such. In addition, some artists just have very special lyrics (like Mew) that should be written the way they are in the cover as to not ruin the "image" of the lyrics.

I don't want to be quarrelsome, and I agree that in most cases proper punctuation and such seems weird (e.g. new pop music - those artists don't seem to care), but I just want people to know that there are many exceptions. Any thoughts on this? --MiSP 08:45, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

I think, in those cases, the formatting should be preserved. In most cases though, lyrics should have capitalized lines without punctuation. Maybe the section should read something like: "Lyrics should follow the artist's format, but if none is given/known, capitalize the first letter of each line and use minimal end-of-line punctuation."
Anyone else have thoughts on this? --WillMak050389 14:42, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

I think that is what people actually do, so that would be better. I've changed it.

- teknomunk (talk,E,歌) 14:54, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

Fantastic. =) Just to give an example - take a look at the song Theatre Of Tragedy:To These Words I Beheld No Tongue. Well, problem solved! --MiSP 15:04, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

[edit] Amazon MP3

With the growing popularity of Amazon's MP3 store, maybe we should consider adding that to the song footer? Each band has their own page, but each song and each MP3 album has its own ASIN. DackAttac 22:55, 6 February 2008 (EST)

[edit] Microformats

How about using Microformats?

• An idea for an Open Format for Lyrics (Note the "<p class="repeatchorus">Refrain</p>")
• hAudio Microformat
• Example of microformats in wikipedia.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.232.24.104 (talk) .

I briefly looked over these links and I think that these would apply to our project. I have looked at Microformats at least once before and I am interested in seeing our project support these. I don't think that the first has been submitted to the microformat.org site yet, so I would be a little hesitant to add that until that is taken care of and we know that the standard doesn't change. I'll talk to the other administators about the matter.

- teknomunk (talk,E,歌,A) 04:19, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

[edit] What if a song is more than in one language?

Like Мишины Dolphinы:Обратный отсчёт, or if the song contains a Latin quotation, or whatever... How do we fill in the template in this case? The Other Saluton 02:51, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

We're currently busy cleaning up all the language categories, and we have run into a similar problem with categories like English/Russian, Serbian/Bosnian/Croatian, Latin/English/Spanish, etc. For the general case, the discussion is at Category talk:Language/Move list. In the specific case of Мишины Dolphinы:Обратный отсчёт I think you can also just use Russian, because the only English in there are the numbers five through one in sequence, so I wouldn't really call it multilingual. --Mischko <img src="/images/3/31/Talkicon.png" alt="Talk to me" /> <img src="/images/1/1e/EsperanzaIcon.png" alt="Esperanza Member" /> 04:05, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Musicals?

Something I've started wondering while doing language identifications- how do we classify Broadway musicals? I've seen songs from, say, Rent, with the artist sometimes listed as one of the performers who sang it, sometimes as "Rent", sometimes as "Original Broadway Cast"… what's the best way to sort this out?NYCScribbler 15:46, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Musicals (both Broadway & movie) are a bit of a challenge, even for me the "organization guy" of the site. There are a number of ways to "attack" the situation of who to use for the "Artist" portion of the pagename:

1. If the musical's composer is super famous, then use the composer. (This pretty much applies to Andrew Lloyd Webber only, though.)
2. If the players in the musical are mainstream, famous performers, then use the performer's name. (Not exactly my favorite, but in some cases it's just better to list, for instance, Madonna's work on Evita as being by Madonna, as opposed to something else.) Some musicals are basically by an artist or two, as well.
3. Something along the line of Original Broadway Cast Of... or High School Musical Cast. This is likely the best way to handle most musical pages. It's more thorough and correct.
4. Use the musical's title, as with your example of Rent, or as with Dreamgirls. As I mentioned, the "Original Broadway Cast Of..." type of artist is really best. Especially if the title of the musical might possibly be the name of a musical group.
5. List the individual singers of the song. This I don't care for, as usually there are multiple vocalists and the list gets to be unwieldy. Then there is the possibility of strange Artist pages being created for each of the artist combinations and with no real link back to the main track listing for the musical.

So, the Best Choice is #3. But, there is currently leeway for a "best fit" solution. As nothing is set in stone at the moment, editors should use their best judgement, and when in doubt, start a discussion and see what transpires.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   03:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Artists

What exactly is the definition of a featured artist? For example, Holly McNarland does the backup vocals on the Matthew Good Band song Flight Recorder from Viking 7; would this count as a feature artist? I have added her to the song template for now, pending an answer to this question. --Aikon- 00:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Well the way I interpret this is if the artist is specifically mentioned/credited on the linear notes. In the example you have given, Holly McNarland is mentioned on the liner notes for Loser Anthems as appearing "courtesy of boredom and frustration." (hee hee). (I got that info from Wikipedia).  _♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪^Talk 00:44, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

That's not how I've been using it! :-P I've been putting it up there anytime another artist appears on a song, so that they can be credited. I think we should add everybody, for the purposes of documentation. --Åqüã†ìкí ƒ_Δ^Σ ¶ 01:59, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... yes and no. While I agree with you that all artists appearing on a song deserve to be credited, I don't think they always fall under "featured artists". Perhaps it would be sufficient to list them (along with listing their contribution) in the Credits section of the song (the song needs this section for Gold status anyway). For example, Todd Kerns was not part of Matthew Good Band, however he provided backing vocals on Hello Time Bomb; this is a situation where I don't really think he deserves mentioning outside the credits (i.e. as a featured artist) since all he did was sing along (didn't even have any solo-singing parts). I don't know.. hence why I was looking for an actual definition =P --Aikon- 02:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Most artists would, I believe, be credited in the linear notes if they were a notable "feature" in another artist's song. It also serves for verification purposes.  _♫Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪^Talk 02:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think either method is really wrong. The parameter's primary purpose is for those songs (truly abundant in modern popular music) that include the line "featuring Super Pop Artist" almost as if it is part of the song title. Including prominent artists for songs they appear on (say, Dire Straits:Money For Nothing, where Sting appears, or Queen:Under Pressure which features David Bowie as a second singer with Freddie Mercury - neither of which actually uses the FA parameter currently, strangely enough) isn't a bad thing, with perhaps one caveat: that they are a vocal performer. As far as I can tell, featured artists are vocalists and not instrumentalists, although there are probably exceptions to that that I'm not thinking of at the moment. (There's always an exception, it seems.) What featured artists shouldn't do is include random musicians and such. That's what the Credits section is for.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   02:46, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] square brackets

For the inclusion of notations in the <lyrics>-part I would like to suggest not only the use of italic text but also the use of square brackets around the notations.

As for the reason see Wikipedia:
"Square brackets are mainly used to enclose explanatory or missing material usually added by someone other than the original author, especially in quoted text."
...and I know this notation for stuff like stage directions.--Speckmade 17:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Multiple Album Appearances

On this help-page is written, that for multiple album appearances the song-template should be used for every apearance. I thought the AddAlb-Template should be used (like on this song: Bonfire:You Make Me Feel)

Can you update the help-site with the correct information? Acccept 03:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)