This template is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
just a navigation aid or an information source?[edit]
Hello, I understand that you say these bottom of page templates are only a navigation aid. I've always looked upon them as an informational summary of all the singles, albums, etc conveniently located at the bottom of each of the DIRECTLY related pages. The infobox often shows a partial chronology of the prior, current, and next item in the series, but I always thought [apparently incorrectly] that I could count on just looking at the bottom for a full listing. There are other articles out there that also display items without a Wiki page in the template. I don't know what the proper word is to describe the items that only have Wiki pages, but I don't think that "Notable" is it. I doubt that the true test of whether an item is notable or not hinges upon the question of: "Does it have a Wiki page? If yes, the item is notable. If no, the item is not notable." There must be many notable things that remain outside of Wiki, just because someone hasn't created an article here it is to be deemed "not notable"? Do you have the better word[s] that I lack?—Iknow23 (talk) 04:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an example [ Talk Talk ] using a template for informational display. It has MANY MANY non-linked singles.—Iknow23 (talk) 02:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did some research on this matter and found an essay titled Wikipedia:Navigation templates, "Consider these views with discretion." It is apparently the de facto concensus as seen by the usage in many other music related articles to include non-wiki linked material that is appropriate to the group headings of the template. Thus material restored.—Iknow23 (talk) 07:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just because there are examples of something being done incorrectly doesn't mean it's right. A navbox is for ease of NAVigating articles, not for collecting information. Musical artist navboxes always, in my experience, have a Discography link. A discography collects all the information about an artist's releases, thus anyone looking at a navbox is only a single click away from a complete list of releases. Listing every release only serves to increase the size of the navbox. There are plenty of navboxes that don't include non-linked singles. Oh, and thanks for pointing out the Talk Talk one, I'll go fix that one, too. TheJazzDalek (talk) 10:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Notable" still doesn't seem to be an appropriate word. See HERE for many uses of "I Want You". I believe that is sufficient to make it "notable" but it doesn't have a separate wiki page. Again it is possible for something to be notable without having a wiki page.—Iknow23 (talk) 01:53, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The section really should just be called "Singles". There is no implication that it's a list of all of her singles. "Notable" here is in the sense of Wikipedia notability, in the case of songs, see WP:NSONGS. "I Want You" does not meet NSONGS and would not pass an AFD. TheJazzDalek (talk) 09:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
