Template talk:Music ratings

Table width and album infobox width
The template doc says that the default width of 24.2em matches the width of the album infobox in most browsers and skins. The album infobox width is 22em. I am using the latest version of Chrome. For me, the Ratings box is wider than the album infobox with the Vector (legacy and new), MinervaNeue, MonoBook and Timeless skins. Also with Firefox and Vector. Is the statement about "most browsers and skins" correct? If not, should Template:Album_ratings be reduced to 22em as well, or should the doc just be corrected? Thanks. Nurg (talk) 08:28, 14 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I have the same issue with the width so I think it's a flaw that should probably be fixed here in the module. Solidest (talk) 13:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)



I suppose the width of this template/module should be changed to 22em to match the width of album infoboxes: see any article in. Solidest (talk) 14:43, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The album infobox's width is almost always set by the size of the thumbnail image, which is 220px by default. Add about 18 pixels to get the total width of the infobox. I have my thumbnail prefs set to 300px, so the Album ratings template is narrower than the infobox. If we really want to match the width of the infobox for all viewers, we need to retrieve the viewer's thumbnail preference. I don't know if that is possible. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think we should first go with the standard settings until we figure out how to implement it better. Solidest (talk) 15:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Line 123 in the module is :css('width', args.width or '24.2em'). I set it to 22em in the sandbox module, and that works well in my Chrome browser. YMMV.  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'r there 20:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It's time for a decision, which is Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: when a resolution has emerged, then the Edit template-protected template can be reactivated by setting no.  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'r there 05:36, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Another template addition?
Hello, there has been a music critic rising to fame in the past ten years, his name is Anthony Fantano. Whether you agree with him or not, he is quite prominent, which is why I am opening a discussion to start adding his personal album reviews to the Album ratings template (the way Robert Christgau has his own category). Please discuss. Marmio (talk) 08:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Fantano and The Needle Drop have been discussed several times, and the general consensus has always been that he can only be used in certain cases – the website is listed at WP:NOTRSMUSIC and you can see previous discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Archive 50, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Archive 54, Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 228 and most recently, Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 326. Richard3120 (talk) 15:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Edit request to complete TfD nomination
Template:Album ratings has been listed at Templates for discussion (nomination), but it was protected, so it could not be tagged. Please add:

to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. QuietHere (talk) 06:18, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅.  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'r there 20:26, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Alphabetical
Is it possible to have the template automatically sort the ratings alphabetically? It gets very tedious having to shift a bunch of parameters just because Allmusic, for example, published their review after the article was created.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 23:58, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That might be difficult, as The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Skinny, etc. should not be sorted under T, and I don't know how a bot would be able to differentiate that. Richard3120 (talk) 20:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe there can be an optional parameter? For example:
 * So ideally, it would sort it "AllMusic, Guardian, Pitchfork" no matter what order the parameters are input.  Bait30   Talk 2 me pls? 23:49, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Silly to have the reviews sorted alphabetically. They should be by date (contemporary reviews should always have prominence) or even by high rating to low rating. Alphabetically by name of publication means nothing.Tuzapicabit (talk) 01:16, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Silly to have the reviews sorted alphabetically. They should be by date (contemporary reviews should always have prominence) or even by high rating to low rating. Alphabetically by name of publication means nothing.Tuzapicabit (talk) 01:16, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Merged
I've done the work to merge Template:Song ratings, Template:Album ratings, and Template:Single ratings into one music ratings template now as a result of the TFD (it was effectively nothing).

I've done the minimal work to update Template:Music ratings/doc to make the language in it applicable to songs as well as best I can. Page watchers may be interested in further adjustment with instructions from Template:Single ratings/doc and Template:Song ratings/doc. Izno (talk) 02:46, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

New template placement
I feel like having the reviews on TOP of the paragraphs is sort of choppy. Shouldn't we place the template to the right of the review paragraphs so that they compliment each other? Kind of like biography templates are laid out. skelter (talk) 19:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Please link to an article that does not display as you expect. Is that article following the instructions in the template documentation? This template is generally the first element after the heading for the section on Reception, Critical reception, Reviews, or something similar. If one of those sections is not present, the template should be placed immediately after the infobox, and can then be moved once a Reception section is present. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:40, 22 February 2024 (UTC)