Template talk:Single chart/Archive 5

Change of "Billboard Global 200" to "Global 200 (Billboard)"
Hello template editors. I hope this isn't considered particularly contentious to change but currently, the Billboard Global 200 entry starts with a B due to Billboard, thus making it the only single chart template entry that is sorted by who publishes it rather than the territory/ies it represents, which is how all other charts are listed in the documentation and thus in tables. I understand and accept that the chart is published on Billboard's website as the Billboard Global 200, however, for the sake of consistency it should be alphabetised in chart tables as "Global 200 (Billboard)" because it (purports to) represent the globe. Even the Billboard Hot 100 is preceded by (and thus alphabetised in tables under) "US" because it represents the US, whereas the name of that chart is also preceded by Billboard. Given that we've evidently made that exception, can this please be changed for the sake of consistency? Thanks.  Ss  112   05:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You can see at the end of the thread above that Bluesatellite asked the same question. I agree that it shouldn't be alphabetised under "B" – if I understand you correctly Ss112, you are suggesting that it is listed under "G"? That seems to make sense to me too – it definitely shouldn't be under "B". Richard3120 (talk) 13:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks Richard, I should looked a bit longer to see that this was already raised. Yes, I think it should go under G.  Ss  112   18:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Finnish Airplay vs Finland Download
There is a slight inconsistency for the Finnish singles charts, as I mentioned in the title. Could someone consider changing it into one for consistency? Thank you. HĐ (talk) 13:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Billboard Global 200 and Global 200 Excl. US
Hi! Can someone please create the entries for the recently released Billboard charts? It's the Global 200 and the Global Excl. US. Thanks! ManuelButera (talk) 15:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * There is already a discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:Record charts – I think consensus should be reached there first before creating new templates. Richard3120 (talk) 15:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * A consensus is being reached. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * A consesus has been reached. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

As mentioned, the consensus is that the Global 200 is okay to use, while only 200 Exc. US should only be applied to songs that don't rank on the Global 200 chart. Since the latter is very unlikely to apply to many song articles, I have edited the sandbox for just the Global 200 chart, tested on the test page, and it works. It just now needs to be applied on this template. Erick (talk) 02:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, and thank you!  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 06:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

One question still bugs me. Where do we should properly place this chart on the table? At the top of the table; at the bottom; by "B" alphabet; or by "G" alphabet? I know it's not that big of a deal, but it's better to have a standard use across Wikipedia. Or should we use Worldwide (Billboard Global 200) instead, so it would be naturally go to the bottom? Bluesatellite (talk) 17:53, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it should go under "G" per my post below, as the template entry for the Billboard Hot 100 is listed as "US Billboard Hot 100" as it specifies the region it represents. Billboard has chosen the word "Globe" to represent the world, but I agree it could also go under "W" for the "Worldwide" option you suggested. It doesn't feel right to list it under "B", even though I've been alphabetising it there reluctantly as that's what the template currently shows. I'm very opposed to putting it at the top of tables as some users have been doing, because the chart is only a few months old and it has not gained anywhere near the level of importance or recognition a chart purporting to represent the entire world's chart data should have. As it's published by Billboard, it has a US focus and users placing it at the top of tables are (whether intentionally or not) giving it WP:UNDUE weight and importance, as if all other charts are somehow secondary in comparison.  Ss  112   18:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen anybody placing this chart's peaks at either the top or the bottom (but then, I didn't notice this question on this page either). But it should not be in either place; we always, always list the weekly (and year-end, et al.) charts in alphabetical order, based on the charts' names. If it's output as Billboard, it should go under "B", if it's output as "Global", which I think it schould be, then it goes in the "G's", probably right after Germany. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 06:27, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Does anybody else have some input on this? do you have an opinion? Do you need a wider consensus before changing the template to emit something like ? Would you like somebody to sandbox a proposed solution for you? &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 05:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ following suit with the other Billboard charts, I changed it to . I hope this is what you meant. --Muhandes (talk) 09:03, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Muhandes; that works quite well. I've just rejiggered the first three articles mentioned by Bluesatellite above, and it looks / they look really nice now. And I didn't expect such fast service; it's not even the end of the week, yet. Regards, &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 21:31, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 23 February 2021
The German chart is missing the "in German" notification. It says

It should say (CC) Tb hotch ™ 22:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅. —  The  Earwig ⟨talk⟩ 05:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

No Time to Die (song) Israel chart
I have no idea what magic makes this template work, but it's not working at No Time to Die (song), Weekly Chart 2020, entry "Israel (Media Forest)". The citation ends up with the title " – Media Forest" which seems wrong. There is a clickable link to, which just redirects to an annoying front page at with no information about this particular song. Is there some way to fix this? GA-RT-22 (talk) 02:39, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, User talk:GA-RT-22. I think you have stumbled upon three problems here, one of which is somewhat tragic:
 * The template's documentation at Template:Single chart/doc is not entirely up to date, and so does not even mention that,  , or   are valid parameters to use. This is something even I can fix, though.
 * The template emits a somewhat dumb message when it has problems (the –  thing you mentioned), as the template required no artist or song parameters to do its job, and so doesn't know what to fill in for its title. This is, I think, something that we (meaning a template tuner like User:Muhandes) could find a solution for. But:
 * It seems that Media Forest has quite annoyingly revamped their site, moved the target pages, and limited their chart displays to the top 5 singles for the week. I would link to an example, but they're so clever over there (with their Ajax or whatever web programming framework they're using), that only the base URL https://mediaforest-group.com/charts/ is visible. This is somewhat tragic and suggests to me that we may have to pull support for Israel from the Single chart template.
 * None of which is good news, but maybe some watcher (possibly with more sophisticated equipment than I have) can find a solution. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 04:19, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I just fixed #2, and as you said, anyone can fix issue #1. However, I don't see a way around issue #3. --Muhandes (talk) 07:26, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Wow, what quick service, thank you both! GA-RT-22 (talk) 12:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Muhandes; looks good. Yeah, #3 kind of takes the fun out of #1 and #2. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Something's wrong with Musiikkituottajat
I'm unsure of how long ago this happened or if anyone has noticed, but the single chart template for Finland is no longer loading the correct pages. Currently, the site url uses "+" as spaces, but when linking to the site via the single chart template, this ends up rendering as "%2B", so a blank artist entry loads. Is there any way to rectify this? ResPM (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 18:18, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , should be fixed. I feel like it should still have worked with post decoding, but apparently not. --Trialpears (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 19:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Poland "Lista Przebojów Programu Trzeciego" Chart
A song article I am watching ("If You Were a Woman (And I Was a Man)") has recently been edited with a new chart peak – no. 5 on the Polish Lista Przebojów Programu Trzeciego (LP3) chart, originally published by Polskie Radio Program III. I noticed the chart is mentioned in the article 'Polish music charts', but I am struggling to verify the reliability of the source given (https://www.lp3.pl/utwor/1183).

Could somebody possibly weigh in on this? Also, is there a particular space on Wikipedia where people discuss matters such as this? I don't want to clog up this talk page if it's not entirely relevant to the article. Skyrack95 (talk) 20:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This has come up before – see Wikipedia talk:Record charts/Archive 14. I'm still not convinced of this chart's legitimacy myself, but we've never come to any firm consensus about it. Richard3120 (talk) 20:45, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't use it since it's based on voting. Also see Wikipedia talk:Record charts. Regardless, I generally don't support charts that don't represent a country's popular music, which LP3 does—it mostly supports rock music. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 21:02, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Addition of Hot Alternative Songs and Hot Hard Rock Songs Billboard charts
Hello. I was wondering if the Hot Alternative Songs and Hot Hard Rock Songs charts could be added to this template. I've experimented with them in sandbox and testcases. These charts were discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Record_charts/Archive_16 and added to Record charts/Billboard charts guide as well. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 20:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This will probably cause some confusion between the use of the parameters "billboardalternativesongs" and "billboardhotalternativesongs". Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 03:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't mind if one gets renamed per Template_talk:Single_chart/Archive_4. Since Alternative Songs is now Alternative Airplay, maybe "billboardalternativesongs" can be renamed to "billboardalternativeairplay"? And Billboardalternativesongs for the new Hot Alternative Songs like you mentioned before. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:08, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

"Unprofessional" format
Recently at Featured article candidates/I Knew You Were Trouble/archive1, two FAC reviewers commented that the format of Single chart including website names in citation titles is unprofessional (i.e. "Australian-charts.com", "Charts.nz"). Since this template is used in a lot of Pop music articles (including the recently promoted "Paint It Black"), and I do not have the authority to edit the template, I hope an authorized editor can edit, or discuss this issue, here or at the FAC so that future Music FACs don't have to deal with this. Looking forward to a response :) Ippantekina (talk) 02:13, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Those titles are taken from the  element of the target web pages, which I realize isn't the way everybody likes it anymore. If there's consensus to change our titles, we can certainly do that. However, this template has been generating these titles this way for over ten years, and has been regularly used on FAs for the same period. Why the sudden complaint? The "explanation" by Nikkimaria that the template's use  is unhelpful, as WIAFA has nothing to say on the topic. User:The Rambling Man thinks  but does not say he intends to put all music-related FAs up for FAR, which would be the logical next step. What's the sudden problem? &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 04:31, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * No, that's absurd. I said I won't support an article at FAC because it has an unprofessional approach to citations.  Just because other articles have passed FAC in the past with such inconsistencies, that has literally nothing to do with the matter at hand right now.  Now either try to be part of the solution, or just keep allowing the problem to manifest.  Either way is fine by me, but I'm not supporting FACs with poorly crafted citations "because that's how we've always done it".  The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 06:24, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That doesn't answer my question (whether actually taking all music articles to FAR is absurd or not); why are you suddenly disturbed by the "unprofessional" look of this template's output? Has this been gnawing at you for the last 5 or 7 years, and you just didn't want to say anything? (We all know how shy you are. ) &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 07:25, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I've only just noticed it? I haven't reviewed many music FACs lately and now I do.  But this is all quite irrelevant to solving this problem.  Just because bad things exist and have done for a while, it doesn't mean they should continue to exist.  Time to start solving the problem.  The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 07:27, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Pinging two FAC commentators  — Ippantekina (talk) 02:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - using the web site's unedited html "title" element as the title for a Wikipedia citation doesn't seem a good approach to me. Those things often have guff in them that aren't really part of the human-readable title that we'd use to refer to that page. For example, all Wikipedia pages append " - Wikipedia" to the end of the page title, but I wouldn't expect a citation to include that. I'd suggest this is a legitimate objection to raise at an FAC, particularly if other refs are not formatted that way. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:56, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

How to implement this
Template editors, e.g., If we have consensus for the removal of the site name (and it seems we do), then it appears we can simply remove it from the template's output. I thought we might have to parse the  element and trim the site name, but it appears that for the Hung Medien sites, at least, that we actually add the site to our title citation output. That would mean changing to
 * Australian
 * Australia=|Australia (ARIA)
 * style="text-align:center;"|
 * Australian
 * Australia=|Australia (ARIA)
 * style="text-align:center;"|

Germany would change (I think) from |German to |German
 * Germany
 * Germany2 = |
 * style="text-align:center;"|
 * Germany
 * Germany2 = |
 * style="text-align:center;"|

Affects Australia, Austria, Belgium (Wallonia), Wallonia Dance, Belgium (Flanders) Tip, Belgium (Wallonia) Tip, Belgium (Flanders), Flanders Dance, Flanders Urban (bloody Belgians), Denmark and Denmark Airplay (not Hung Medien, but we seem to handle it the same way), Dutch100, France and Frenchdigital, Germany and West Germany, Ireland3, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Romandy and Portugal.

Possibly I have missed some. Looking at the Media Forest ones like Israel and Romania, we might need to change title citation output for those, too. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 08:17, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * At last, so positive action. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 08:25, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I do actually agree with this change: "australian-charts.com" and the rest always seemed a bit "bare URL" to me. I'm not a coder at all so I'm just trying to get my head around it, but am I right in thinking that the output for the new code would read "Artist – 'Song title' – ARIA Top 50 Singles", or something similar? Richard3120 (talk) 13:09, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I would also like to note that the same problem exists ("australian-charts.com" and the likes) at Template:Album chart for Hung Medien-published charts. Ippantekina (talk) 13:27, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The proper solution would be to burn this template down and recreate a proper one which reuses some of the code. But since no one has the time for the proper solution, this should work. Just put a version in the sandbox, test it in the testcases page and I'll be assist by rechecking and moving it to the right place. --Muhandes (talk) 17:14, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * JohnFromPinckney, Muhandes Hello, may I ask how is the progress going. Ippantekina (talk) Ippantekina (talk) 13:23, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that ping will work, so doing it agin here:, . The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 13:24, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Fix the problem in the sandbox and I can assist by rechecking and moving it to the right place. --Muhandes (talk) 15:15, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, I have removed website names from titles for Hung Medien-published charts, namely: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Dutch 100, Dutch 40, France, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Portugal. Please check if my edits function properly. Thank you very much, Ippantekina (talk) 02:04, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Update: I have also tested the changes. Ippantekina (talk) 04:27, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * There are changes in 23 certifications but only 12 of them are tested. Can you please add tests for the rest? Just to be on the safe side, when updating a template used by approximately 32,000 pages. --Muhandes (talk) 10:09, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Tested all. Some observations: all work fine, but "Romady" is deprecated; while the links to Belgium's Urban and Dance charts are not in the references. Ippantekina (talk) 11:12, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Update regarding Ultratop charts: according to this the genre charts (Dance, Urban, R&B etc.) have been discontinued since May 2021. I have updated the url formats for Flanders Dance and R&B/Hip-Hop and tested both. Ippantekina (talk) 13:34, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * For start, by "Romady" I assume you mean "Romandy". I fixed the test, please make sure it works to your satisfaction. But more importantly, you removed the option "Flanders Urban" which removes an unknown number of references, which is not good practice. You also changed the behavior of "Flanders Dance" which will make more references dead. I suggest that instead of that, you add them as new types. Even better, revert that change so I can sync with the original one which looks fine, and then start a new thread to discuss this change. --Muhandes (talk) 18:24, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Reverted. All is set now I believe. Ippantekina (talk) 01:53, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Please ping me if there are any issues. --Muhandes (talk) 07:20, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your help. Ippantekina (talk) 08:52, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * And thanks to you both. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 10:10, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 15 November 2021
A small goof with the Dutch40 template, which is missing a period/full stop after the publisher. I have saved this change in the sandbox and tested it, and I would like it implemented. ResPM (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 12:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 19:23, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

New Billboard look
Billboard has updated their look. Thankfully, the artist pages for the template are still existing, but it looks like we're going to have to update the urls. Compare Madonna's previous location to her new location (in the url, "music" changed to "artist", and the chart code is now lowercase, but the url is not case-sensitive). All in all, it looks like we dodged a bullet. ResPM (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 00:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Just for the record: I hate, hate, that fucking company. If they weren't the go-to source for US charts/performance/sales, I'd insist that we  go to them or use their pathetic site(s), if only on the basis of their volatile "resources". Got nothing against their magazines; at least  don't get completely changed every couple of years, with some pages torn out, others moved around, etc. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 02:08, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I made the requested change but I'm not sure how to fully test it because the current version of the testcases does not include real examples for all charts. I did notice Billboardeuropeanhot100 stopped working. Please verify this all works, fix the sandbox as required, and then I can move it to the main space. --Muhandes (talk) 12:12, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have tested everything you have updated, and the only charts that are not working are Billboardsinglessales, Billboardbubblingrandbhiphop, Luxembourgdigitalsongs, and Portugaldigitalsongs. I have checked with multiple artists but came up empty, and unlike last time, I don't think Billboard is listing the wrong chart header. Hot Singles Sales and Bubbling Under R&B use full chart names instead of three-letter codes, and Luxembourg and Portugal do not load with their previous designations. As for the European Hot 100, I don't have a subscription to access the site, so I am unable to see what has changed there. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 13:42, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Since the current URL does not work, we are not losing anything by updating it, so I went ahead and did that. I think we should still try to figure out those missing five charts. --Muhandes (talk) 14:28, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Those four or five charts are no longer published by Billboard, and while I think it retained their data on the previous /music/ URL iteration, this recent refresh has killed off that data. I know for a fact the Bubbling Under R&B/Hip-Hop Songs/Singles chart code used to be RBU, but that no longer appears to work, so I would say those template links are dead for good this time around. Agreed, they annoy me a lot too—they change their sites on a whim and don't redirect the old URLs to the new ones, the URLs for artists with prolific chart histories go down without explanation or get moved to some stupid name that nobody would think to enter, and they also appear to be teetering on the edge of locking most of their charts behind an actual paywall again—something inaccessible just like their billboard.biz experiment used to be.  Ss   112   15:23, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have my issues with the OCC and their charts in the UK as well, although not as bad as Billboard. Anyway, thank you to all of you for taking the time to test and update these links. Richard3120 (talk) 15:29, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Of the five charts which no longer exists, we need to decide what we want to do (may apply to album charts as well). --Muhandes (talk) 11:18, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Starting with documentation, one was already marked as defunct in the documentation (Billboardeuropeanhot100), I marked two more (Luxembourgdigitalsongs & Portugaldigitalsongs), and two were not documented to begin with (Billboardsinglessales & Billboardbubblingrandbhiphop). I'm not sure if you want to add those last two to the documentation and mark them as defunct or just keep them as a hidden feature.
 * I created which collects pages using these five charts (as well as the defunct Billboardbrasilhot100 and Philippines), in case someone ever wants it.
 * Moving on to citation, I think we may want to keep the older URL for these charts and throw in a . That would be more correct than using a URL which can never work as if it is good. Also, using the old URL will throw a 404 and so the editor/reader may understand they need to look for an archived version. What do you think?
 * Regarding the archived versions, I noticed in many cases The Wayback Machine has an archive, but I'm not sure it is useful. For example, "I Knew You Were Trouble" used Luxembourgdigitalsongs and we have an archived version, but I can't find the chart. Any thoughts? Is there anything we can do?
 * I think we should add Billboardsinglessales and Billboardbubblingrandbhiphop to the documentation with a strikethrough so we can least let other editors know that they once existed. It may prove useful for them in the future. The hidden category is a good idea as well. Using is better than removing citations, although I will admit that I've taken the latter action on several occasions for really old sources or bare urls. As for Taylor Swift's Luxembourg archive, it looks like it is the correct chart but with a wrong header, which I mentioned above. All the peaks match. Check the snapshot made on December 15, 2019; this one uses the right name.  ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 12:56, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I added the two defunct charts to the documentation for posterity. --Muhandes (talk) 10:08, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Billboard is a mess because they are constantly changing the content at a given URL, and constantly changing what URL the content is located. Probably the only way is treat every URL added to Wikipedia as immutable. Never to be modified (that includes not modifying via template). If it stops working, add an archive URL with a timestamp close to the access-date. If there is none, add a . Otherwise never-ending update URLs when Billboard makes a breaking change, creating layers of content drift and verifiability problems.  --  Green  C  23:25, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The template cannot add an automatic archive-url so this is not an option. I think a, a preview note that this template usage should be replaced with a working archive and a hidden category may be the best we can do. Anyway, I think we don't to replace /music/ with /artist/ if we know it doesn't work. --Muhandes (talk) 10:12, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

I see that there are no more comments, so I am assuming the preferred solution is a so I am moving forward with that. --Muhandes (talk) 08:37, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Renaming charts
Sorry for sashaying in, but should we rename Billboard charts as well? For example, Mainstream Top 40 is now Pop Airplay, and Adult Top 40 is now Adult Pop Airplay. We should change chart names in this template and in the articles, if possible. Ippantekina (talk) 13:39, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * There used to be a difference between what the print edition and pro/pay version of the website called the charts versus the main website (Mainstream Top 40 and Pop Songs, for example). If Billboard has unified that then I would recommend those changes, although I'm not a fan of seeing peaks for songs like "Smells Like Teen Spirit" on the Alternative Airplay chart when it was Modern Rock Tracks back then. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 18:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I know you prefer using the chart titles as they were at the time of the record's charting, and I must say I agree with you, although Billboard changes these chart names with such frequency it's probably too complicated to add them all to the template. But it does seem very odd to see, for example, an album from the 1970s listed on "Top R&B/Hip Hop Albums" when that's a completely incorrect description of the music of the time... "Soul LPs" (as the chart was then) is a much better title. Richard3120 (talk) 18:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * And changes today are made without any fanfare...the change from Songs to Airplay, for example, so we can't always pinpoint when changes were made anymore. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 18:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I hope you don't mind, but the discussion above was ongoing so I broke this discussion out to another section. --Muhandes (talk) 21:47, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I think the name change is not a big problem--RIANZ renamed to RMNZ, CRIA renamed to MC, etc. and all articles are now synchronised. If readers may find the changed chart names problematic though, we can implement an optional parameter for chart date (or even more simply, year), so that the chart name will render correctly as "Top 100 Airplay" / "Radio Songs" or "Mainstream Top 40" / "Pop Airplay" etc. Ippantekina (talk) 15:08, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that's a fantastic idea in theory, but a lot of research will have to go into it. It'd have to use specific dates—e.g. Album Rock Tracks was renamed to Mainstream Rock Tracks on April 13, 1996. Like you said, we should only do this if it's absolutely necessary for the readers, and right now, it's not a problem, especially since we can pipe links in the prose. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 15:59, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, in theory it would be good to use the chart names of the time... for example, it seems very strange to have the Bee Gees listed on the "Hot R&B/Hip Hop Songs" chart for their songs from Saturday Night Fever, when there's no way you could describe those tracks as either R&B or hip hop. On the other hand, if we use "Soul Singles", as the chart was then, it would be a better description of the songs, but wouldn't match the name in the Billboard database, which could confuse readers.
 * I've also considered the question of renaming chart providers in other countries to what they were at the time... a big hit in the UK from the 1970s or 80s will display the OCC in the weekly chart, but either BMRB or Gallup in the manually-formatted year-end chart, which looks a bit confusing. Richard3120 (talk) 17:23, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I think the name change a big problem, as it (again) makes it harder to discuss chart performance clearly. (And yes, I realize our planet also faces the problem of changing music styles and listening patterns, and Billboard is right there in the trenches, fighting to keep things clear for us. Etc., etc.) Changing a music association's name is not as complicated as changing several of the music charts (and frankly, I couldn't keep up 10 years ago with all the variants like Hot Rock & Alternative Songs, Adult Alternative Songs, Alternative Airplay, Hot Alternative Songs, etc. I'm forever consulting WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS to sort things out.). The best approach for  is to use the name of the charts at the time of the peak (but somehow avoiding double-reporting as if they were two separate charts), not simply rename, and redirect the old chart names to the article on the current name, which presumably mentions previous incarnations. The best thing for  is to just use the current name. Trying to maintain a set of chart names for each template parameter is more work. I'm not sure we're up to that level of effort. As RPM says, we'd need to have some cut-off dates. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 20:11, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have noticed on rare occasion where editors have entered chart positions for, say, a 1998 album for both the Billboard 200 and Top Albums Sales charts (distinct charts today) with the same position listed for each since historically they are the same chart. In terms of chart names, would it be possible to set up a parameter that allows to override the default from, for example, "Billboard 200" to "Top LPs & Tape". It would have to be done manually but at least there'd be an option within the template. Thanks. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 18:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Update names and redirects?
Could anyone update names or at least redirects? Eurohunter (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * You need to be more specific and tell us which names and redirects you are talking about. Richard3120 (talk) 15:30, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are referring to the Billboard website change, see discussion above. Otherwise, it would be useful if you specify what names need updating or redirecting. --Muhandes (talk) 11:20, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Don't you use .mw-body-content a.mw-redirect {color:#008000}? I will list links probably later or tomorrow. Eurohunter (talk) 15:32, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, you are talking about redirecting the wikilinks for the charts? Sure, if you provide a list I would be happy to correct them. --Muhandes (talk) 09:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Singles
 * Albums
 * Organisation or chart name in bracket? Add link to Dutch Albums and replace "Album Top 100" with Dutch Charts? Otherwise what with linked Canadian Albums (Billboard)?
 * Eurohunter (talk) 17:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to figure out what you want to fix because it is not always clear. Perhaps the best would be if you edited the sandbox yourself. Here are some questions about the changes for singles:
 * I didn't find any Official German Charts in the code, but I did find Official German Charts. The name for the charts is actually "Official German Charts", but anyway, wouldn't Top 100 Singles be better?
 * Replacing Recorded Music NZ, wouldn't Top 40 Singles be more accurate?
 * I found no Gaon so I don't know what you meant.
 * I moved the requests for the album charts to Template talk:Album chart --Muhandes (talk) 11:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Chart names would be more accurate but there is problem because they changed a lot of times. About Germany I mean GfK Entertainment charts link to redirect. Eurohunter (talk) 20:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I avoided the redirect on Official German Charts and Tracklisten as these are abviously uncontroversial requests. --Muhandes (talk) 08:06, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have the same problem as Muhandes trying to understand what you want. Perhaps it would be clearer if you could explain in separate examples (and double-checking your work for correctness), like "Change A to B", "Change C to D", etc. Or do as Muhandes suggested: edit the sandbox to the best of your ability. Don't worry about getting the syntax perfect; that can be fixed. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 20:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no German and Korean charts in the template because I mistakenly took them from tables. Eurohunter (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I made some minor readability changes. I stroke down the Korean request and all the album requests. I implemented more of your uncontroversial requests, specifically the Dutch and Czech links. I noticed for the latter there is one such link for Slovakia. I changed that one to Rádio – Top 100. I'm leaving the rest for discussion. --Muhandes (talk) 08:21, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Organisation or chart name in bracket? Add link to Dutch Albums and replace "Album Top 100" with Dutch Charts? Otherwise what with linked Canadian Albums (Billboard)?
 * Eurohunter (talk) 17:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to figure out what you want to fix because it is not always clear. Perhaps the best would be if you edited the sandbox yourself. Here are some questions about the changes for singles:
 * I didn't find any Official German Charts in the code, but I did find Official German Charts. The name for the charts is actually "Official German Charts", but anyway, wouldn't Top 100 Singles be better?
 * Replacing Recorded Music NZ, wouldn't Top 40 Singles be more accurate?
 * I found no Gaon so I don't know what you meant.
 * I moved the requests for the album charts to Template talk:Album chart --Muhandes (talk) 11:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Chart names would be more accurate but there is problem because they changed a lot of times. About Germany I mean GfK Entertainment charts link to redirect. Eurohunter (talk) 20:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I avoided the redirect on Official German Charts and Tracklisten as these are abviously uncontroversial requests. --Muhandes (talk) 08:06, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have the same problem as Muhandes trying to understand what you want. Perhaps it would be clearer if you could explain in separate examples (and double-checking your work for correctness), like "Change A to B", "Change C to D", etc. Or do as Muhandes suggested: edit the sandbox to the best of your ability. Don't worry about getting the syntax perfect; that can be fixed. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 20:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no German and Korean charts in the template because I mistakenly took them from tables. Eurohunter (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I made some minor readability changes. I stroke down the Korean request and all the album requests. I implemented more of your uncontroversial requests, specifically the Dutch and Czech links. I noticed for the latter there is one such link for Slovakia. I changed that one to Rádio – Top 100. I'm leaving the rest for discussion. --Muhandes (talk) 08:21, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I made some minor readability changes. I stroke down the Korean request and all the album requests. I implemented more of your uncontroversial requests, specifically the Dutch and Czech links. I noticed for the latter there is one such link for Slovakia. I changed that one to Rádio – Top 100. I'm leaving the rest for discussion. --Muhandes (talk) 08:21, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

UK Zobbel
Hello. Is there a reason why UKZobbel is not mentioned in the template documentation yet is used in Template:Album chart? Also, I discovered the URL that is generated is wrong, like at Crawl (Kings of Leon song). For example, the old url should be the new url. I know we talked about Zobbel before at Template_talk:Single_chart/Archive_3 but I didn't realize it was no longer in the template transclusion. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:15, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add it to the documentation. As for that URL, are you sure this is a case of an old URL changing to a new URL? In other words, did this type of citation ever work? I thought it always worked by using the id of the chart update, e.g. 081004, which will make the template point here. --Muhandes (talk) 13:42, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Dunno about the old/new URL. As for ID, it definitely makes it a lot easier pointing to an individual week. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:18, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Ultratop new URLs
Hello. Both Flanders/Wallonia have new URLs for Belgium. For example: old is new for Flanders and old is now new for Wallonia. Luckily the song id is the same for both Flanders/Wallonia. It might have to be formatted like Germany where songid is required in the URL. The URLs currently redirect to the new ones. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It's been like this for a while, and at least they redirect us to the right page. The Swiss site also underwent this transition and still works, and it's quite possible that the other Hung Medien sites will follow suit. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Even the new Billboard urls are technically redirects (uppercase code to lowercase code). ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 19:18, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Didn't know Hitparade also changed their URLs. Hopefully the redirects will still work --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:25, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Duplicate reference names
The prior mentioned article was edited after I asked, so let me rephrase.

How does one fix the duplicate error in Baba_O'Riley? It is using a singlechart template which is generating an error Cite error: The named reference "sc_UK_" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page) but I do not see where "sc_UK_" was defined. Kaltenmeyer (talk) 16:18, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You removed my previous answer, but it is still the correct answer... Add refname, see example here. --Muhandes (talk) 17:03, 26 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you Kaltenmeyer (talk) 17:10, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Israelairplay singlechart broken
Working on recovering a bunch of dead links on Hotline Bling, when I noticed that the ref for its chart performance in Israel is dead. This seems to be using the single chart template, calling something I can't see, which yields this link. However, there seem to have been some changes with mediaforest, and I don't know how to access historical data from them in their website's current form; instead, it redirects to their new home page. More importantly, the template/wikidata/whatever points to the old URL on every page it's used on. See Category:Singlechart usages for Israelairplay. How should I fix this? None of the requisite info seems accessible via the Wayback Machine, as, even if the page is archived (it is in the relevant date for Hotline Bling), the archived page doesn't seem to be able to load the relevant information.

Hope that explanation was somewhat clear. Not sure what I should do for the Hotline Bling article. Lkb335 (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This was reported a year ago in Template talk:Single chart/Archive 5 and we have no way around it. The chart is defunct and will probably remain so. It does not appear in the documentation and rightly so. If anyone has any idea how to prevent using it in the future I'll be happy to try to help implementing. --Muhandes (talk) 09:10, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Why aren't the references in the templates linking to the official charting sites?
I have noticed that a bunch of the templates used for the Australian and New Zealand charts don't link to their charting companies but refer to a third party site in Hung Medien. Specifically more in the case for New Zealand, where I changed the link to the official charting website (RMNZ) and I got reverted. One of these editors advised me to bring this up here. The Official Charts Company and Billboard charting templates link to their respective official charting website, so why can't Australia (ARIA) and New Zealand (RMNZ) link to their official charting companies? As well as a lot of European countries which have these templates as well. I get that Hung Medien is viewed as "acceptable" via WP:GOODCHARTS, but wouldn't be better to be the official source instead of a third party site that collects charting information? I don't understand how this isn't the case. Wouldn't readers of articles who click links in the charting tables rather be reverted to the official charting websites instead of Hung Medien? It's more credible and reliable if it comes directly from the primary source. If the Official Charts Company and Billboard chart templates can do this, then why can't others? Rockmusicfanatic20 (talk) 20:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I personally support using first-party websites, and there was a discussion a while back about Sweden's chart that never really got off the runway. At any rate, while New Zealand's RMNZ site seems complete and id-based, Australia's ARIA site appears incomplete and date-based; I cannot access any charts before July 2019. I always say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," and the Hung Medien sites aren't broken. Yet. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 21:25, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hung Medien sites aren't broken? Check Greek or Mexican charts by Hung Medien. Eurohunter (talk) 22:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This is the first time I'm hearing of Greek and Mexican charts on Hung Medien. I don't know what you're talking about. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 22:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * They were available like ten years ago. Eurohunter (talk) 22:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, things tend to change within the vast timeframe of 10 years. Regardless, I'm not against replacing this site. All I'm saying is that there's no reason to do so now since most of the charts are still active. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 23:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Like, I would prefer to use the first-party websites where possible. When this template was set up many years ago, many of them didn't have their own chart archives, so the Hung Medien charts were the only option. But I think these should be kept as a backup option, because first-party websites often chop and change and disappear. Richard3120 (talk) 20:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

From what I remember when these were originally created, it wasn't always possible to use all official websites due to how the links render. The prevention of linkrot and standardisation of listings was seen as a better compromise. ≫  Lil- Unique1  -{ Talk  }- 22:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hits of the World charts
I was wondering whether or not they should be included since the charts can be seen by typing the date after them. Also, I was checking Imagine Dragons's chart history page and I saw that the Hits of the World charts are available in the dropdown menu. However it doesn't look like they can be accessed by typing the chart's name in the URLs and the chart codes are unknown. Sebbirrrr (talk) 18:36, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Regarding the technical side, chart codes can be easily found. For example, the code for Luxemburg songs is "I12", i.e., https://www.billboard.com/artist/imagine-dragons/chart-history/I12. In other words, there is no technical difficulty to use any of the hundreds of charts Billboard has. The issue is not technical, it is whether a chart is notable and can be used, something that should be discussed at WT:CHARTS. Once there is consensus there that a chart is notable, you can make a request here and someone (maybe even me) can add the code. --Muhandes (talk) 10:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * By the was, you correctly identified this chart as the new "Hits of the World" chart, which started February 19, 2022. There was also an historic Luxemburg Songs chart (code LUX), which was discontinued. This is going to be quite confusing with some charts now existing twice, e.g. Germany Songs, where charts until February 12, 2022 have code GES and are archived here and the new Hits of the World chart from February 19, 2022, has code I01 and is archived here. --Muhandes (talk) 12:19, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * we should also note the "Hits of the World" was what Billboard called the page in the magazine which displayed charts of various countries, back in the 1970s to 1990s... obviously not a technical issue as these charts can't be called automatically using the template, but I hope editors don't assume the these are the same charts as the current Billboard ones and start adding them manually as such. Richard3120 (talk) 12:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That's a valid point. Again, this talk page is specific for discussing the template. The template reflects two things 1) the consensus, as discussed at WT:CHARTS, and 2) our technical capability to access an archive. I don't think there is no accessible archive for the old Hits of the World charts from the 70s, so they are probably irrelevant for this page. The confusion should could be discussed at WT:CHARTS. --Muhandes (talk) 13:14, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

UK Rock & Metal Singles Chart
I've always thought the UK Rock & Metal charts looked weird in the single chart template because it uses and instead of &. This is inconsistent with the Official Charts Company website because they use UK Rock & Metal to title the chart |Official Rock & Metal Singles Chart Top 40. I'll be honest, it's always bothered me and why I've resorted to manually do it with syntax myself. I thought this could be a syntax issue with the template which can't use &. But then I remembered that the US Hot Rock & Alternative Songs single template uses the & where it's titled correctly that is consistent with the Billboard charts. Is there a reason why it's using the and instead of the & or is this just an oversight when the single templates were being developed? I would suggest this be changed to & in the single template to remain more consistent with the Official Charts website. --Rockmusicfanatic20 (talk) 11:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Probably because whoever wrote the template was following MOS:AMPERSAND. In general British English uses the ampersand ("&") far less than American English does, we much prefer to use "and". I guess the OCC uses the ampersand to save space, but if this is the official title of the chart, then I agree it should probably be changed in the template as well. Richard3120 (talk) 20:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I genuinely didn't know that the and sign was called an 'ampersand'. You learn something new every day. I think regardless of what the Official Charts Company were doing with ampersands. They are still in the official name of the "Official Rock & Metal Singles Chart" so the chart template needs to be renamed for the sake of consistency. I hope someone is able to do this soon. Thanks. --Rockmusicfanatic20 (talk) 00:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Following the article name we use since 2015 UK Rock & Metal Singles Chart, and the text we have always used following that link "Official Rock & Metal Singles Chart Top 40", I think this is simple an error and there is consensus that this ampersand is "a legitimate part of the style of a proper noun" per MOS:AMP. I don't see any objection, so I just went ahead and implemented it. ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 08:05, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * no objections from me at all, I agree that this appears to be the official name of the chart and the naming convention should follow that. Thanks for making the change, Muhandes. Richard3120 (talk) 14:34, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Record charts
I have started a discussion regarding the apparent disappearance of Slovakia's pre-2016 charts at Wikipedia talk:Record charts. Please participate if you are interested. ResPM (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 22:39, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Bulgarian singles chart - still at www.bamp-bg.org ?
Hi, does anyone know if the Bulgarian singles chart are still available online anywhere ? I have checked www.bamp-bg.org but cannot seem to locate them. Thanks. QuintusPetillius (talk) 17:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Further to the above, Record charts states that "The acharts.co source is valid" but in Record charts it says that "Bulgarian National Top 40: This chart's article was deleted by deletion discussion as a non-notable chart with dubious methodology. Note: the chart at αCharts.us is a mirror of the Bulgarian National Top 40". So there seems to be some contradictory info in the Recommended charts and the Deprecated charts. I am aware of the official top 10 at https://www.prophon.org/ which does not match the other chart. QuintusPetillius (talk) 19:21, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Formatting preventing change to previous names of charts?
On chart tables in song's articles, there must be some weird formatting that won't allow changing the "Hot R&B/Hip Hop Songs" row to whatever the name of the same chart was at the time of a single's appearance on it. This is because, since its inception, the name of Billboard's Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Chart has changed many times in order to accurately reflect the African-American music industry at the time. For example, the chart was named "Hot Soul" during the 1970s, and was known as "Hot Black" during the 1980s. I know this problem also affects other charts who had different official names in the past. Jim856796 (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, this has come up before. Although I personally quite like the idea of the chart tables reflecting the actual names of the charts at the time, the problem is that the Billboard chart archives only use the current names of the charts. So a casual reader clicking on the citation for a Billboard Hot Soul Chart position from the 1970s is going to be taken to the Billboard Hot R&B/Hip Hop Songs Chart, which may be confusing for them. In addition, as you have noted, all the charts have undergone MANY name changes over the years, and it's going to take a lot of coding for someone to change every chart to accurately reflect the name it was given at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard3120 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Since this template was written in such a non-modular way, allowing an optional chart name parameter will require more or less rewriting the entire thing. I'm not against that, and there are many other improvements required over the years, but it isn't something I personally am going to be able to do in the next few months. --Muhandes (talk) 17:57, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * One example of a conflict regarding this happened on the article for Somebody's Watching Me last February. I tried to change the "Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs" column to "Hot Black Singles" because that's what the "R&B/Hip-Hop Songs" chart was officially named at the time of "Somebody's Watching Me"'s original appearance on it. However, Synthwave94 changed it back to the current title a couple of times, and after each revert I warned him not to do so. Shortly after his last reversion, Synthwave94 decided to let the "Black Singles" title stay, but changed the source from Billboard to AllMusic.Jim856796 (talk) 19:55, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Custom reference
How to add custom reference like "salesref" in case of template Certification Table Top so we don't have same reference twice? Eurohunter (talk) 15:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It's a good idea, but since this template was written in such a non-modular way, allowing an optional reference parameter will require more or less rewriting the entire thing. --Muhandes (talk) 19:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Links and references update
Links to charts:
 * Tophit → TopHit ✅
 * UK Dance → UK Dance ✅

Links in references:
 * CIS and other charts: Tophit → TopHit ✅
 * European Hot 100 Singles: Billboard European Hot 100 Singles → Billboard
 * All UK charts by Official Charts Company: Official Charts Company → Official Charts (yes, website of Official Charts Company is called "Official Charts")
 * Finland: Musiikkituottajat – IFPI Finland → Musiikkituottajat ✅
 * France: Les classement single → lescharts.com (no link)
 * Germany: GfK Entertainment charts → Offizielle Deutsche Charts

Eurohunter (talk) 19:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I added ✅ next to the ones I felt are undisputable. The rest actually change the look so I need some rationale and perhaps then maybe gain some support. --Muhandes (talk) 19:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * In the case of the OCC, OfficialCharts.com is the name of the website, Official Charts Company is the name of the organisation in charge of the UK charts and who run the website. Surely the link should be to the overall organisation who actually collate the charts, rather than one specific website where these charts can be found. Richard3120 (talk) 20:07, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You add name of website exactly no matter what. "Official Charts" is like brand of Official Charts Company. Eurohunter (talk) 22:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Links update
I am copying here a request made by at Template talk:Album chart:
 * Flanders Tip (Ultratip Flanders → Ultratip Flanders)
 * Wallonia Tip (Ultratip Wallonia → Ultratip Wallonia)
 * Romaniaradioairplay (Romanian Radio Airplay → Romanian Radio Airplay)
 * Romaniatvairplay (Romania TV Airplay → Romania TV Airplay)
 * Billboardeurodigital (Euro Digital Song Sales → Euro Digital Song Sales) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eurohunter (talk • contribs) 11:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 09:37, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

UK R&B chart name change
The chart has been called "Official Hip Hop and R&B Singles Chart Top 40" for a while now. The template uses "UK R&B". Could we perhaps update the template to include Hip Hop ie. "UK Hip Hop & R&B" or "UK Hip Hop/R&B"?  Cool Marc  ✉   06:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I see no objection being made so I changed the title to "UK Hip Hop/R&B". ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 09:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * can the reference it generates also be changed so the title of the reference is 'Official Hip Hop and R&B Singles Chart'? ≫  Lil- Unique1  -{ Talk  }- 22:12, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅. --Muhandes (talk) 12:01, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Reference
Reference for Sweden has incorrect name of website and link. There is link  but website is named   - we don't use   website. Other countries also has incorrect names of websites in references - not all because some references has correctly added name of websites but most of them are outdated. Eurohunter (talk) 22:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I believe this is because the Swedish Recording Industry Association has been publishing the chart since 2006/07 and the official name of the chart is Sverigetopplistan. SwedishCharts.com is a website owned by Hung Medien which archives the weekly charts in a format that can be recalled and used as a reference. When Singlechart and Albumchart were generated, it was felt important to include the actual name of the chart publisher which might differ from the website that publishes the chart. A different example would be the UK - charts are published and generally sourced from the Official Charts Company. However, the Irish Singles Chart can either be sourced from IRMA or the Official Charts Company. Both publish the chart. Depending on which template editors choose to use, the reference will reflect this. ≫  Lil- Unique1  -{ Talk  }- 00:31, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If we quote any website with cite web template we add its name of cited website not name of website where data come from (in case of digital books we could use "via" parameter but here is no reason for that). It's not part of table - it's reference where information was taken from. Template generates wrong names. There is no logic in it. It's clear example how to not add references. If you qoute swedishcharts.com - yes site called "swedishcharts.com" under same URL address "swedishcharts.com" - you are not quoting other website called "Sverigetopplistan" under different URL name "sverigetopplistan.se". URL name ≠ website name. If you would add such references manually it would fail any FAC (I hope). This is not Billboard magazine available via World Radio History. Sverigetopplistan and swedishcharts.com are two different websites. Eurohunter (talk) 13:44, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Module:Check for unknown parameters?
The documentation says that template uses this module, but it is not present in the code. Has it been there and been removed or has it never been there? Perhaps it should be added again? Solidest (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * My best guess is that this is a documentation copy paste error from the sister template Album chart, which does use this module. Using this module is usually a good idea, but the single chart template is in such a sorry state that I would rather rewrite the template than spend any more time on improving it. If someone else wants to do it, be my guest. For now, I corrected the documentation. --Muhandes (talk) 06:53, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Finland links broken
Finland templates need fixing. For example, currently links to https://www.ifpi.fi/tilastot/virallinen-lista/artistit/Shawn%20Mendes/There%27s%20Nothing%20Holdin%27%20Me%20Back but correct link is now https://www.ifpi.fi/lista/artistit/shawn+mendes/there%27s+nothing+holdin%27+me+back/ Heartfox (talk) 22:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't think it's broken; it's just redirecting. Most redirects are working correctly (see "Insomnia", "Wings of a Butterfly", "No Air"). The problem with using Finland's chart template is that using certain punctuation, in this case the apostrophe, causes a blank page to be thrown up since said punctuation isn't converted into a percent code the site can understand (e.g. ). Another example is "Don't Forget About Us" (compare the URLs of this and this). I'm not sure if there's a workaround besides citing the chart manually.  ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 00:36, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ From some reason the redirect broke the link. Bad programming on the Finnish side, but easily avoidable - I fixed the template to avoid the redirect and it seems to work correctly for both "There's Nothing Holdin' Me Back" and "Don't Forget About Us". Let me know if any problems arise. --Muhandes (talk) 09:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Muhandes. That didn't fix the punctuation issue entirely, but at least more pages are accessible now. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 11:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * If you have examples which don't work I can give them a look. --Muhandes (talk) 11:46, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Parentheses are the other common issue I've seen. Compare this to this. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 11:50, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ The issue was the closing "/" which was missing. I also took the opportunity to remove PATH decoding since default decoding (using "+" for space) is usually more robust and I didn't see a reason not to use it. Let me know if this causes any issues. Anything else? --Muhandes (talk) 12:17, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * None that I can think of. Apostrophes and parentheses were the only issues I encountered, but I'll let you know if anything else comes up. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 12:47, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick fix! One thing I notice is that the download chart renders as "Finland Download" while the radio chart renders as "Finnish Airplay". Can we change the latter to "Finland Airplay" for consistency? Most single charts don't use the country's name as an adjective. Heartfox (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sure makes sense. --Muhandes (talk) 09:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

UK Charts
Hello I wonder if we can update chart names per their URLs and what they're actually called. See below:
 * UK Download --> UK Singles Downloads as the official chart name is Official Singles Downloads Chart
 * UK Streaming --> UK Audio Streaming as the official chart name is Official Audio Streaming Chart

There's also a bunch of other UK Singles charts that are officially published but not currently templated like:
 * Afrobeats
 * Asian
 * Christian & Gospel Albums
 * Classical Artist Albums
 * Classical Compilation Albums
 * Classical Singles
 * Jazz & Blues Albums
 * Punjabi
 * Scala Singles Chart
 * Specialist Classical Albums

Can we consider making these? >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 20:29, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ on the titles, I don't see why anyone would object to that.
 * For that charts, there is no technical issue to implement them, but a) I would not go that way unless someone intends to use them extensively and b) I will take the opportunity to redo all the UK charts as a separate sub-template. This should have no effect on usage, just ease the life of future maintainers. --Muhandes (talk) 09:16, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to be fair. I wonder if Afrobeats would be useful given that this is a genre we're seeing and hearing more about. I do wonder whether others are not used because the single chart template doesn't exist or if there are less active editors in those areas (I suspect the latter). >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 11:23, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * another possibility is that editors are simply unaware that some of these charts exist, and it has never occurred to them to go looking for them... I'm still amazed that there is such a thing as the Country Chart in the UK, given that the genre has so few followers in the UK and sales figures must be extremely low most weeks, probably even just in double figures at the bottom end of the chart. By the way, what are "Scala Singles"? Richard3120 (talk) 19:36, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Its like a Alternative-Classic-Fusion genre chart for "classicly-inspired songs". According to the OCC its The Top 20, compiled by the Official Charts Company, reveals the most streamed classically inspired songs from the past week. The Official Scala Singles Chart is based on classically influenced tracks, including music from the classical genre, plus orchestral versions of popular music. Only tracks released within the past 12 months are eligible, and only two chart entries per artist are permitted. I am more personally surprised that we have a Christian and Gospel Albums chart... >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 20:00, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I've used UK Afrobeats Singles Chart recently in discographies (e.g. ZieZie) and I can certainly see it used more as the genre gains more exposure. I see Billboard also jumped on that wagon with Billboard U.S. Afrobeats Songs. Muhandes (talk) 12:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Particularly if the trend of crossover songs continues. Apparently Beyonce's Renaissance will spawn an act II which is Afrobeats and R&B >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 16:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Where at officialcharts.com do you see name such as "UK Singles Downloads"? It's unavailable now but from the preview it is "Official Singles Downloads Chart Top 100". Eurohunter (talk) 12:02, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Eurohunter what you've just said is the exact point I've made. The template renders the name of the country, followed by the name of the chart. At the moment (or prior to my request), the UKstreaming template rendered "UK Streaming" because the chart was formally the UK Downloads Chart. However, changes have been made because of the expansion of the number of charts. The official charts name is Official Audio Streaming Chart Top 100 because there is also a video streaming chart which is published for the wider industry. The URL/page title is Audio Streaming so the name of the chart should match accordingly. Same applies to Singles Downloads. We (as in Wikipedia) shorten the chart names so that we don't write it out in full. Singles Downloads loses the words Top 100 (which are irrelevant at the OCC also produces a top 40 and a top 200, the latter is for industry only), and the word official as again that's superfluous. I don't see the challenge/issue you are trying to highlight, unless it was that the url wasn't working - it seems to be a temporary bug. >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 12:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Pls add template to Category:Record chart templates
Can somebody with editing privileges please add Category:Record chart templates to this template? Thanks. —  AjaxSmack 20:31, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅, but categories are added in the documentation page, which is not protected. --Muhandes (talk) 10:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I wouldn't've guessed about the cats being in the doc page since they don't seem to appear anywhere on that page. —  AjaxSmack  17:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Billboard Afrobeats chart
Hello,

I was wondering if the Billboard U.S. Afrobeats Songs could be added to this template, perhaps with the code billboardafrobeats. Citing it is the same as the other Billboard charts except for the last three letters AFB.

CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 13:27, 8 November 2022 (UTC)


 * We had a similar discussion two months ago (albeit regarding the UK version); see here. I don't object, but we will need to know that editors will widely use it. Muhandes (talk) 15:23, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no objection either, but I agree with Muhandes... it's not fair to make him create this template if it's barely going to be used. Richard3120 (talk) 15:25, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * There are a growing amount of Afrobeats songs getting attention and it would make things easier to add these charts to the pages if it is in the template. I would also like to know if the World Digital Song Sales chart could be added as well given that one is certainly widely used. CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 16:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Category bug?
Was browsing through some song articles, most recently Anti-Hero (song), and noticed some red categories (Category:Single chart making named ref, Category:Single chart called without artist etc). Is this a bug or am I the only one seeing this issue? Ippantekina (talk) 02:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

📝 "Don't get complacent..." 04:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Pinging @Timrollpickering who was the most recent person to have edited the template. ‍ ‍ Elias 🐍 ‍  ‍ 💬 "What did I tell you?"
 * See Categories for discussion/Log/2022 November 27. The categories are in the process of being created. I created these two categories manually., but I think it might be better to wait and let the bot move the rest. I see that a bot started moving them but was stopped by after doing half of them. I'm not sure where it stands now. Muhandes (talk) 10:17, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see the discussion below about "the official charts company"
Template_talk:Album_chart >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 23:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

SNEP and IRMA charts
Is it correct to list SNEP and IRMA for French and Irish charts respectively? Both articles incorrectly state that SNEP and IRMA compile their charts. In reality, the Official Charts is the compiler and in both cases the publisher of the data. French charts are not (yet) listed on the Official Charts website but Irish Ones are. Per this Music Week article, it very clearly says "the official charts company compiles" the chart. >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 23:59, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I believe it's a "OCC compiles on behalf of IRMA" thing: Also, the OCC only publishes the top 50; IRMA publishes the full top 100. The Irish Singles Chart page on OCC's website says © IRMA, as does the Irish Albums Chart page on OCC, so I think that attribution counts for something. As for France's charts, while the OCC may compile the French data for SNEP now(?), they obviously don't have the same deal that IRMA and the OCC do to publish the French charts on the OCC website.  Ss   112   15:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Add streaming charts
Request to add streaming charts such as "Rock streaming songs" and "Alternative streaming songs". Dontuseurrealname (talk) 18:01, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If you're talking about the Billboard charts in the US, these may be component charts of the Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart, in which case they shouldn't be used in addition to the Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart. But I don't know for certain that this is the case – hopefully someone else can confirm. Richard3120 (talk) 18:14, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * the Streaming charts for Rock Song and Alternative songs are indeed components of the Hot Rock & Alternative chart. You can add them to an article if a song hasn't charted on the combined chart. But if if it has, then they should not be included in the chart table. >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 18:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Lil-unique1, @Richard3120: do you object to adding these charts to the template? If they are only going to be used rarely, then I would rather not waste my time. Muhandes (talk) 14:18, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I'm not at all sure how often they will be used... I would have thought that if a song charts on one of these streaming charts, it's very likely to have charted on the main Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart as well, in which case the streaming chart shouldn't be added. Richard3120 (talk) 23:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That's my thought process as well. Muhandes (talk) 23:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Portugal Airplay chart
Hi. I was wondering if anyone could create an entry for the portuguese airplay chart that is available in Audiogest's website. It would work just like the certifications that use the Audiogest website. Thank you! ManuelButera (talk) 11:03, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I assume you would want to use chartid as a parameter, e.g., file_2023-01-02-04-18-58.pdf for this chart. Assuming there are no objections to including this chart in this manner, the best approach would be if you could implement this at the sandbox (don't forget to sync it first) and ask for a sync back. Failing that, you will need to explain exactly what you want the citation to look like, since this template (unlike the certifications one) does not have any infrastructure, which means that anything needs to be spelled out and redone for every entry. Muhandes (talk) 13:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Are you no longer interested in this? I will certainly not add it if no one is going to use it. --Muhandes (talk) 14:17, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I planned on replying and then just haven't had the time. Yes, I'm still interested and yes it would use the chartid as a parameter. However, what do you mean when you say to implement it at the sandbox? Thank you! ManuelButera (talk) 23:40, 12 January 2023 (UTC)


 * If you know how, you can edit Template:Single chart/sandbox and implement what you want. Nevermind that, I had a go at it myself, see here. Looking at it, I'm not really sure about the text. --Muhandes (talk) 11:02, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry for taking long to reply again, I've been crazy busy this month. Maybe "Portugal Airplay" instead of "Portuguese Airplay" sounds better. But besides that, it looks good to me! ManuelButera (talk) 11:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ This discussion has been going on for there weeks and no one objected, so I guess there is no reason not to go live. I really hope this is going to be widely used, otherwise I wasted my time. --Muhandes (talk) 16:53, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you! ManuelButera (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Polish charts
For a few days there's a change in Polish charts, which should be implemented in this template and which I've explained here: Polish music charts. These are the only charts published in Poland (i.e. there's no chart combining airplay and streaming). King10 (talk) 18:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The airplay chart, which is used in the template, is not updated on this website anymore: http://bestsellery.zpav.pl/airplays/top.php. This website still exists and has the full archive of the time it was updated (until January 2023). New charts are published here: https://www.olis.pl/charts/oficjalna-lista-airplay. Unfortunalety, this new website - at least from what I see - has archive only for the time this reform is applied (since January 2023), doesn't have an English version and cannot generate links to single charts - they can be seen only via changing dates under "zmień zakres od–do:" or by exporting to txt/csv/json/excel (on the bottom of the page).
 * There's a new streaming chart published here: https://www.olis.pl/charts/oficjalna-lista-sprzedazy/single-w-streamie with the same issues as airplay chart.


 * I've implemented Poland2 in the sandbox. You can see the result at the Testcases and tell me what you think. The text might not be clear enough.
 * I'm not sure how often the streaming chart will be used, but if there is consensus (or at least no objection) to adding it, I can add it the same way quite easily.
 * Muhandes (talk) 17:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Muhandes (talk) 17:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)


 * For me it looks great, thank you! I think streaming is worth adding, since nowadays it's more important than airplay, and two charts for one country are not too much for this template. King10 (talk) 17:51, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @King10: You can now use Poland2. As for the streaming, I tend to agree, but let's wait a couple of weeks to hear if there are any objections or better ideas of implementation. Please remind me in two weeks time. Muhandes (talk) 17:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Ultratip Bubbling Under
Is it possible to make Ultratip Bubbling Under in Template:Singlechart this is for songs that come after 50th place that have the number 999 : https://www.ultratop.be/nl/ultratip/2020/20201226 and https://www.ultratop.be/nl/ultratip/2020/20201226, please thank u. RoundTeen (talk) 12:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)


 * There are already templates for these: Flanders Tip and Wallonia Tip, but you'll have to scroll down to the Discography section to view Tip peaks. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 12:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * But can you do like Wikipedia in French they put Bubbling Under after Tip : https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mod%C3%A8le:Singlechart, please thank u --RoundTeen (talk) 13:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I think this is a good idea since I've seen several instances of people confusing Ultratop and Ultratip, saying a song reached the top 10 in Belgium when it really didn't. It might help to clarify. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 13:24, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank u, very much RoundTeen (talk) 15:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't have the power to do this, but I'll see what I can do. Pinging to see what they think. Is this a good idea?  ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 16:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @, : I'm not sure I don't fully understand the request. Are you asking to replace the two instances of Ultratip with Ultratip Bubbling Under? Muhandes (talk) 20:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I think that's what's happening. It'd end up looking something like this:


 * {|class="wikitable"

!Chart (20XX) !Peak position
 * Belgium (Ultratip Bubbling Under Flanders)
 * align="center"|42
 * Belgium (Ultratip Bubbling Under Wallonia)
 * align="center"|42
 * }
 * align="center"|42
 * }


 * Am I right or wrong here, ? If it's not what you had in mind, please adjust the table. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 20:40, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅. --Muhandes (talk) 11:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

SNEP Sales Chart
Request to add "SNEP Sales Chart" please, thank u RoundTeen (talk) 00:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You need to provide the markup for and links to the chart yourself. You cannot expect template editors to even know what you're talking about without providing a link. Related to this, would you be able to conform the Frenchdigital entry to just state "France Download (SNEP)" instead of it being "France (SNEP) Download Chart"? No other chart here has text after the parenthesised publisher, which makes it look somebody who doesn't know how to conform chart names added it to an article (which is what I thought until I realised it's part of the documentation). The publisher should be at the end and "Chart" should be dropped for consistency with all others. Thanks.  Ss   112   15:58, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Nothing to do with that, it's another: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mod%C3%A8le:Singlechart it's Franceventes RoundTeen (talk) 17:11, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Only the part of my message before I tagged Muhandes was to do with you.  Ss  112   01:08, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok RoundTeen (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm still not sure what you requested. I don't speak French so pointing me to the French wiki does not help. Muhandes (talk) 11:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * , look :  RoundTeen (talk) 20:44, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @RoundTeen: This does not tell me anything that I didn't know already. See the original comment by ss112. Besides, isn't this a component chart? Muhandes (talk) 08:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It is. I think the point RoundTeen is making the point that French Wikipedia has included it. >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 12:59, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The French Wikipedia also has flags in the certification table which would be against MOS:FLAGICON here. We don't follow the same rules. Muhandes (talk) 16:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The French Wikipedia also has flags in the certification table which would be against MOS:FLAGICON here. We don't follow the same rules. Muhandes (talk) 16:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

TopHit
TopHit upgraded the site and now the links don't work. Please fix it.
 * Before (Russia and Ukraine): https://tophit.ru/en/chart/russia/weekly/2023-02-24/all/all / (CIS): https://tophit.ru/en/tracks/164494/view
 * After: https://tophit.com/chart/top/radio/hits/russia/weekly/2023-02-24 / https://tophit.com/tracks/164494

And by the way, the CIS chart has already stopped tracking only CIS countries and is spreading to many other countries. Sanslogique (talk) 11:11, 10 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I was never a fan of CIS charts. Its regional and I'm not sure the methodology is fully understood. >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 12:52, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅. Muhandes (talk) 17:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Israeli Radio Ze Rock's International Rock Chart
Hey, I'd be grateful if you could add Radio Ze Rock's "Israel's International Rock Chart"

Thank You! PurpleBuffalo (talk) 10:08, 14 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Isn't this a WP:SINGLEVENDOR? >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 12:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * My apologies, you are right. Withdrawn. PurpleBuffalo (talk) 07:22, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Finnish Charts - Hung Medien
Hello I was wondering if we could add Finnish Charts by Hung Medien to Template:Single chart. Other Hung Medien related websites are used in the template, like charts.nz and swedishcharts.com. It goes back to the end of 1995 and has the Top 20. This date also matches the earliest archive that IFPI has. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:57, 26 March 2023 (UTC)


 * @MrLinkinPark333: I just noticed your request. I see no reason not to do it, I have added this to my TDL. Muhandes (talk) 07:51, 17 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @MrLinkinPark333: I'm sorry for the delay in complementing this, I just couldn't put my mind to it. I just gave it a shot, and I'm not sure what to put as the chart name. You can see some examples here, the last two lines. Do you think I should use Suomen virallinen lista as the chart name like the other chart does? --Muhandes (talk) 09:27, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries! I think Suomen virallinen lista would work as it is the chart name per IFPI. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 14:37, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:33, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 8 July 2023
It is Slovak, not Slovakian Republic, therefore "Slovak" [chart] is a proper adjective to use, not often mistakenly used "Slovakian". Evernit (talk) 00:51, 8 July 2023 (UTC) Evernit (talk) 00:51, 8 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Please can you make required changes in Template:Single chart/sandbox? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:24, 8 July 2023 (UTC)


 * – while both "Slovakian" and "Slovak" are still commonly used, the only correct demonym listed at Slovakia is "Slovak".  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'er there 17:41, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

archive-url, archive-date and url-status
Is there any way to add parameters "archive-url", "archive-date" and "url-status" to reference? Eurohunter (talk) 21:09, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not aware of any way to do that. To add it in a generic way will require a complete rewrite, which is not planned for the near future. If you have a specific requirement, someone may tailor a solution. --Muhandes (talk) 12:09, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * There should be this option same as in standard references. Eurohunter (talk) 16:43, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Great, we all agree that [t]here should be this option same as in standard references. If you have the skills to rewrite this template, go ahead and do it with our blessing. Unless something changes considerably in my real life, or someone is willing to pay for my time, I am not planning to do this in the near future. Muhandes (talk) 16:49, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

UKsinglesbyname problem
There's a problem with the UKsinglesbyname template. The Official Charts site has updated its look, and the URLs have altered slightly. The old URLs have artist names separated by spaces. The new URLs have them separated by hyphens (-) The template needs to be updated to fix this issue. ResPM (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 18:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I've added this to my TDL, but I am very busy these days so I don't know when I'll have time to investigate it. If someone can supply a solution in the sandbox, I'll sync it. Muhandes (talk) 11:50, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ I've made a correction that works on the testcase example and on the examples you provided but I can't say it will work for all cases as I don't have a broad test case set. Let me know where it fails. --Muhandes (talk) 08:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Error on using the template
Hi! So, I want to use this specific template, the Hung Medien template for Portugal, to a group named Fifty Fifty. It was registered as "Fifty Fifty [KR]" on the website. So, when I tried to use the template, it was an error, probably because of the brackets. Is there another way for me to use this template or should I just use the usual way of citing the web? Byy2 (talk) 13:38, 26 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The way I usually do this is to replace the left bracket with %5B and the right bracket with %5D in the template. It looks weird in the citation's title but works regardless. I remember seeing another workaround a while ago but can't recall what it was. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 13:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the very late response, I just noticed it. I suppose this could be fixed systematically, if you give me pointers to the exact place where it needs to be corrected. Since, as pointed earlier, no one is planning to rewrite the template, we will just need to kludge it. --Muhandes (talk) 08:30, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Proposed addition of Billboard Philippines Songs single chart
I made a code about Billboard Philippines Songs single chart. Can someone please add to the single chart code? —KTerPalmers (talk) 05:49, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Philippines2=|Philippines (Billboard) |style="text-align:center;"|

Single charts missing from the template
Hello. I see single charts that are being used but are not in the template per Category:Single chart usages:
 * Argentina, Finnishradio, Flanders Dance, Flanders Urban. Hungaryradio‎, Israelairplay, ItalyFIMI, Norwegian, Vlanders, Wallonia Dance.

Alternatively, Dalmatia doesn't work, and Hungarytop10 is citing the Hungary Single Top 40 instead. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 16:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Chart-name parameter?
In the past, it's been discussed whether we should modify Template:Single chart so that the information provided is more historically accurate. For example, how Alternative Airplay was called Modern Rock Tracks, how Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs was called Hot Black Singles, and how Pop Airplay was called Top 40/Mainstream. Discussions didn't proceed far since it seemed too convoluted to go through issue after issue of Billboard seeing exactly when chart names changed. I agree; this would take a very long time to accomplish, and if a chart name changes again, we'd have to keep updating the template to include new year ranges.

However, what if instead of taking the long and winding road, so to speak, we take another angle on this. Perhaps a chart-name (tentative name) parameter could be created. This parameter will be optional, but it will allow users to manually pipe the current links set by the templates, that way we can better represent what a chart was called during a certain era without sacrificing the usage of the template (such as here). Furthermore, chart-name could also be used to change an organization's name if it was called something else previously or if another company compiled a country's chart. Examples include RIANZ (now Recorded Music NZ), Topplistan (now Sverigetopplistan), AFYVE (now PROMUSICAE) and Gallup (once compiled the UK chart).

If this update is technologically possible, I would like to hear some feedback. As I said before, creating a chart-name parameter would help improve the historical accuracy of chart tables by a large percentage if users are willing to search through Billboard archives and make the appropriate tweaks. Users won't be forced to use it, but it might help to encourage them to during GA and FA reviews. Historical accuracy is very important in high-quality articles, and a chart-name parameter would help ease some of the stress without doing too much work to get there. If this is implemented, template names won't need to be changed/updated as often, unless redirects aren't ideal in the coding. ResPM (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 11:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I support a chart name parameter. The current template forces the use of incorrect chart names.  —  AjaxSmack  05:20, 20 October 2023 (UTC)