Talk:Drug Addicts (song)

Failed verification
Re: Special:Diff/850899952 None of these fail verification so I'm not sure why you said they do. The editor  whose username is Z0 19:16, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Rolling Stone calls it a "Trap-styled single".
 * 2) Tidal has the credits for the producer and the personnel section. It doesn't show directly on the page so you'd have to click options on the right side and then "Track info".
 * 3) The Swedish chart shows "Drug Addicts" at 9th.
 * The editor  whose username is Z0 19:17, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) It is described as "trap-styled", not "trap". Similarly, when something is "classical-styled" or whatever, it is most likely not classical. 2) I missed that on the website, thanks. 3) Why include this Swedish chart? zzz (talk) 19:23, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Trap-styled as in its genre is trap, trap is a genre. Music publications tend to use vague wordings and they wouldn't directly say, e.g. "the genre of Drug Addicts is Trap." Why not include the Swedish chart? There's a lot of space and I think the maximum number of charts in a song article is 10, so I don't see why this should not be included. The editor  whose username is Z0  19:31, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually that makes sense. However WP:INDISCRIMINATE says "Excessive listings of unexplained statistics. Statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing; accordingly, statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability, and articles with statistics should include explanatory text providing context." I think the Swedish chart should be removed (in the absense of any eexplanatory text). zzz (talk) 19:47, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The recommended limit of charts on discographies is 10. There is no limit for chart tables on album or song pages, and I hardly see how four or five charts or even a large chart table falls under the category of "unexplained statistics" or an indiscriminate collection of information. They are self-explanatory (they are charts listed in a section clearly labelled "charts", how much more context do you need?), and plenty of similar articles contain very little prose and a significant chart table. We have experienced editors noticing and editing those all the time and nobody kicks up a stink. Nothing needs to be deleted at all.  Ss  112   01:15, 19 July 2018 (UTC)