Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Flaming Lips
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Seems premature
...to start such a project. You have 1 member, no GAs, no FAs, and no action plan. It would be far better to work within the confines of the existing music projects imho. --kingboyk 13:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Songs?
It has been pointed out in the the band template discussion that the songs that have Wikipedia articles are kinda oddly selected. So, I'd like to propose this:
- In the band template, there should be links to every song released as a single, i.e. Unconsciously Screamin', She Don't Use Jelly and This Here Giraffe. These articles should be given a higher priority than non-single songs, and some of them shoulkd be pushed for GA.
- In addition, every song contained on an album should have it's own article, at least from In a Priest Driven Ambulance on. These songs will be in subcategories by album in a large "Flaming Lips Songs" category.
- All non-album songs, like Boombox experiment stuff, can go in a list, Miscellaneous The Flaming Lips Songs. If we play our cards right, this could go on to be a Featured List.
So, what do you think? Also, should we consider tracks on EPs and the b-sides to singles "album tracks?" -MajorB 22:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree that all singles [1] with articles should be linked from the band's template. I don't agree that every song on an album should have its own song, only notable songs. If all the songs become notable enough, then they can all have articles. (No band, not even the Beatles really has an article for every song. That's a bit too much, imo.) Generally, we should follow what others have already done with respect to musical acts on Wikipedia. If you have examples you'd like to point out, please do. I think the best thing to do right now is to work on articles that already exist, before moving on possible articles that could be written. I'll help out more once my graduate work eases up. --Rajah 00:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Also the point on the template talk page was that the template songs were oddly selected, but not that the songs that have Wikipedia articles are oddly selected (although that may be true as well.) Wikipedia is an organic/amorphous site, it's not designed ahead of time. The other songs will get articles if they are notable enough. Considering that their five or so most notable, i.e. famous, songs have articles, I think we have a good start. --Rajah 00:28, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good for now. I seem to recall that a lot of Pink Floyd songs have articles, but that is besides the point and you are right in that we should not swamp ourselves with more work. As for the template, how about this for a solution: Rename the "songs" heading to "singles" (as the most notable songs should be considered the singles, at least for now), and all the singles added to it, the only ones linked being the ones with articles. We can make articles for them later. I suppose we should put up a to-do box... I've been meaning to create an article for Wastin' Pigs EP. -MajorB 03:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- It looks like the category is "singles," and if I recall correctly, all of those songs are singles too. So, should we add in non-linked names to the other singles? And, what do we do with Mr. Ambulance Driver? I don't recall that being a single. The template would look like this. -MajorB 03:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Mr Ambulance Driver should go in a list of Non-album tracks or something. i.e. in the FL main article. As for templates, let's looks to the pixies group: [2] notice it is clean, that every single of theirs is linked and has na article (almost). some of the articles are stubs, like the one i linked to and some just link back to the album on which they appeared. I think we can emulate that. i.e. create a new article for every FL single (not song though) and either start a stub or link it back to the album it appeared on. I strongly lean towards stub creation at least as fleshed out as the pixies song i linked to above. i.e. year, album it appeared on, that box maybe etc. We don't have to create all of them at once either. --Rajah 04:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Should Non-Album tracks have their own catagory? B-sides, etc? That would solve the Mr. Ambulance Driver problem. But would we be dealing with more pages than necessary? Kdwman 18:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good for now. I seem to recall that a lot of Pink Floyd songs have articles, but that is besides the point and you are right in that we should not swamp ourselves with more work. As for the template, how about this for a solution: Rename the "songs" heading to "singles" (as the most notable songs should be considered the singles, at least for now), and all the singles added to it, the only ones linked being the ones with articles. We can make articles for them later. I suppose we should put up a to-do box... I've been meaning to create an article for Wastin' Pigs EP. -MajorB 03:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)