User talk:Hello Control/2

Needs album titles as subheads
Very good job, and providing far more detail than I'd imagined it would. This would also allow the use of the album covers, providing there's a measure of critical commentary ... whatever that means. (And I'll confess here, I've never grasped this point. Does this mean every album article containing album cover art has to quote from a review, for example, to include this? Few articles would meet this condition.)

I do think, though, that the albums themselves need to be highlighted by more than just the infobox -- is there a way of adding a subhead to mark each new album more clearly? Grimhim (talk) 00:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There definitely needs to be something to better separate the albums—I haven't done any sort of formatting yet, I just pasted the contents of each album article onto the page. Feel free to try out anything you want and save it; the page can always be reverted back to its original form or someone else can pick up where you leave off. — Hello, Control Hello, Tony  01:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The album titles should be the main headings, then maybe track listing and personnel as subheads. Divisions below that should be bold font. -Freekee (talk) 04:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * This was the first thing I was going to say. Also, is there any way to suppress subheads from showing up in the TOC?  I also think it might be worth exploring a horizontal infobox for albums - one that could be used to mark divisions between albums as well as give the basic information current infoboxes do.  A horizontal infobox would also prevent infoboxes from overlapping or causing empty space when the individual album content is shorter than the box.  These entries have a lot of information, and I really think a lot of these could remain independent.  Compare these to the albums in, say, the Earth discography.  Good work though.  &mdash;Torc.  ( Talk.  ) 08:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The TOC issue has been handily fixed by Blast Ulna, and I've added headers for each album entry. — Hello, Control Hello, Tony  16:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts
This is obviously an example of what would be a very long discography. If it were decided that it was too long and seperate articles were needed. Do we create article for them all or just the most notable?


 * I think the contents box is a problem. I suggest it should only contain the album titles. I think Template:Navbox should also be looked into as a possibility -- neon white user page talk 01:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Your question about whether separate articles would be created for all albums in a long discography is a mindblower: reading again through the WP:MUSIC talkpage, you were one of the most vocal in asserting the importance of individual albums having notability before they warranted a separate article. One of the prime reasons this whole structure has been set up is to deal with the issue of certain albums in an act's catalogue not having demonstrable notability. So the answer would be no, just the most notable. And nor should an album's inclusion in such a discography preclude it from having a separate article if it warranted it. Grimhim (talk) 02:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with that, i'm mainly conerned with how it would be formatted. Do we remove the album to a seperate page and leave just a link to it or leave the basic info and have a lot of overlap? -- neon white user page talk 15:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it's very important that if we're going to try setting something like this up that we take extremes into consideration, which is why I chose a band with a long but not especially notable discography. I've checked out some existing discography pages (Bob Dylan, Led Zeppelin, Bruce Springsteen, The Beatles) and I think I like the Beatles' one best for a starting point (largely because it includes track lists with the albums) and did a mini-mock-up here. It's only two albums, and only includes title, release date, label/cat#, and song titles so it would definitely need some expansion to be viable.

We also need to hash out exactly what information should be included for each album on the discography page.

One thing I keep coming back to is the infobox—the current album one doesn't quite work on a page like this, but with some modification could prove quite helpful, I think. One or two columns of song titles (depending on LP or CD release) and an infobox should fit neatly on a page, providing ample information while keeping page size down and readability reasonably high. — Hello, Control Hello, Tony  16:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * i was thinking you could encorparate the entire info into a template. -- neon white user page talk 18:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

A lead?
I noticed that every album section starts with phrases like Crack the Sky is the debut album by American rock band Crack the Sky, Animal Notes is the second album by American rock band Crack the Sky etc. (I know this is because they have been brought here from seperate articles). Mentioning the band name in every section is obviously redundant. I think a lead that explains who's the discography is and some additional info, number of releases etc or even an infoxbox similar to the one here would allow us to take out the repeated info from every section. -- neon white user page talk 16:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Obviously self-evident statements like that can simply be removed. The U2 discography you linked to, or The Beatles discography both are good examples of intro paragraph/overview text that should start out the page. — Hello, Control Hello, Tony  16:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)