Template talk:Infobox artist discography

Linked title

The "Artist" parameter is part of the title ("__ discography"). The description says, "Use an internal link". However, this is a distinct contradiction with MOS:INFOBOX, which says under Consistency between infoboxes in bullet point #4, "It should not contain a link". It's also similar to what it says in MOS:HEADINGS: "Headings should normally not contain links, especially where only part of a heading is linked." --Musdan77 (talk) 06:18, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Images

Using images with this broke at some point in the past. I've recoded the image handling, per the request of someone trying to use this template and getting strange results back, and it should work exactly as intended now. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Style violations

This infobox violates multiple style guidelines, including:

1. "Do not include links to sections within the article; the table of contents provides that function" (Purpose of an infobox).
2. "... infoboxes should not be arbitrarily decorative" (Style, color and formatting) - the garish colors serve no purpose.
3. " If the material requires a reference ... and the information does not also appear in the body of the article, the reference should be included in the infobox" (WP:INFOBOXREF) - it is not possible to add sources to this infobox.

All of these problems could be fixed by converting the infobox to a more conventional style like {{Infobox artist}}. RockMagnetist(talk) 04:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Here is a replacement template: {{Infobox artist discography2}}. It is designed so that it will work with the same fields as {{Infobox artist discography}} (it will simply ignore the color and link fields), so the only change necessary in each article is to replace the name of the template replace the code in the latter infobox. RockMagnetist(talk) 05:39, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

See this template in action at David Bowie discography. It has the additional aesthetic advantage that it doesn't compete visually with the image of the artist. RockMagnetist(talk) 06:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Please let me answer your points one by one:

1. "Do not include links to sections within the article; the table of contents provides that function". True, we don't need any links in the infobox.
2. "'... infoboxes should not be arbitrarily decorative' ... - the garish colors serve no purpose." These colours serve the purpose of helping to distinguish between the type of releases (albums, singles, EPs, etc). Since this is basically a table summing up the numbers of various releases it becomes much more readable when each row has a different colour than with a uniform background. The standard infobox template is designed for a mix of numbers and strings in the table cells which makes it more uncluttered by default than a repetitive pattern of "text | number". The colours are there for a purpose and apparently there is consensus for including them since 2007.
3. "'If the material requires a reference ... and the information does not also appear in the body of the article, the reference should be included in the infobox' (WP:INFOBOXREF) - it is not possible to add sources to this infobox." See the other "References & footnotes" discussions above. We just don't need references for this infobox because there is nothing to add that is not already referenced in the list itself.

That said I propose to remove the links from the original template and redirect {{Infobox artist discography2}} here as it is redundant. De728631 (talk) 19:18, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I will consider points 2 and 3 separately, in case there is more discussion of the points. 2. Color: I think you're saying that the color makes it easier to see which number goes with which label. It's true that the numbers are pretty far from the labels. However, the current color scheme probably doesn't meet the color guidelines in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Color. And it's ugly. Here are some possible approaches:

1. Use the same color for all the entries (the white lines show the separation)
2. Use a plain table format with lines.
3. Decouple the table from the image, so an appropriate width can be chosen for both. RockMagnetist(talk) 21:49, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Have a look at Template:Infobox artist discography/testcases, where I compare solution 1 with the existing infobox. RockMagnetist(talk) 17:58, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

It turns out that I can achieve the same effect with much simpler syntax using the standard infobox template in {{Infobox artist discography2}}. Check out the new look at David Bowie discography. RockMagnetist(talk) 18:25, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

That's actually an excellent solution. I was just about to code something of my own in my user sandbox but I think your latest version of {{Infobox artist discography2}} is just what we're needing here. It has a single subtle colour that enhances the table rows and it's also much easier code-wise. Now I think we should merge {{Infobox artist discography2}} to the original {{Infobox artist discography}}. De728631 (talk) 21:57, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Glad you like it. Merging sounds like the right solution. RockMagnetist(talk) 00:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

The documentation would also need merging. RockMagnetist(talk) 16:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I have looked at the merger process for templates in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion and Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Administrator instructions, and it seems to me that there is a lot of procedural complexity that would only make sense if it were necessary to remove the template from any pages. Instead, I am going to copy and paste. RockMagnetist(talk) 21:40, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Done. RockMagnetist(talk) 21:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Alt parameter

ALT parameter not working edited out for now, I'm not versed enough to apply a fix. Mlpearc (open channel) 22:42, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

 Fixed. Most of the parameters in this template accepted only "Sentence case" parameter names (like "Image" but not "image"), but "alt" was lower-case only. I have modified the template to accept "Alt". – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:13, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Type order

I believe that Soundtrack album should be listed right after Studio album. For most of artists, soundtrack albums were among their primary releases, very much the same importance as the studio album. Elvis Presley, Barbra Streisand, Phil Collins and many others have released soundtrack albums of entirely new material. In some cases such as Purple Rain (1984) and Glitter (2001), they were promoted just like studio albums. Meanwhile, live albums and compilation albums usually only compiled the previously released material. Bluesatellite (talk) 04:44, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

When new discography additions cannot be verified (WP:V)

Greetings! There is an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies#When are citations needed within the discography?

Your contributions would be highly welcome! Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 17:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Add Remixes parameter?

I have cleared the errors in the parameters in the parameters and there are about 20 templates left with the "Remix" parameter filled in: Category:Pages using infobox artist discography with unknown parameters. I think it would be useful to have it separately, as too often discographies have this section to keep adding it via "1Option". Solidest (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

• Ok, nvm, it seems that this row is only used on 82 [1] + 16 [2] templates now or only 208 articles that use this template have "Remixes" section [3]. Out of ~5450 templates it's only 3,8%. So a separate parameter is probably not needed yet. Solidest (talk) 15:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

  Or maybe it's still worth to have it? As "Internet" parameter is only used in 5 articles, "B-sides" in 115, "Tribute" in 114: stats. Solidest (talk) 16:52, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Any objection to including default infobox option bodystyle

As title; |bodystyle= would allow the whole infobox to be sized and positioned, if needed, without the need for a wrapper e.g. <div>...</div>. I see no reason it could be a problem; just being polite. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 07:22, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

What articles do you want to use this for? I'm inclined to think that absolutely every infobox should have the same appearance without custom formatting, and therefore this parameter is unneeded. Solidest (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

I can imagine many ways it might be used without breaking sitewide consistency (I like that too), but the param exists in the base infobox to allow for edge cases, and I don't know of it being a problem. My discovery of the param came when looking for a default method of floating one on Gacharic Spin to the left since the right-floated images have pushed it down a bit, and I think the images shouldn't be shoved around. However, since I'm currently working on fleshing out the article, the issue has been significantly reduced; not to say it wouldn't still be nice-to-have. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 16:04, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

This infobox definitely doesn't need to be placed on the left-side to solve such problems - that's exactly what messes up the standardised look. Speaking of this article, image sizes are larger than the recommended sizes and should be reduced - currently images are 450px wide, while the recommended size is no more than 400px. Not to mention that the images themselves can be placed on the left (which should not be the case with infoboxes in most cases). Solidest (talk) 17:23, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Every image on that article is explicitly set to 300px. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 17:52, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Oh right, my bad. But they still look bigger than they should in my opinion (plus it's recommended to set the size via "upright" parameter). So it's not really a problem with the infobox, but with the way how images are formatted. Solidest (talk) 18:33, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

short description

This template should include a short description that is intentionally blank to further reduce the number of pages without a short description. -1ctinus📝🗨 11:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 26 September 2024

Please expand label7 to say "Extended plays" instead of "EPs". The normal reader will not understand right away what an "EP" is. Jalen Barks (Woof) 02:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

EP is an extremely common abbreviation I think, across all walks of the music industry as well as in use by collectors and enthusiasts; it would be a reasonable compromise to use {{abbr}} to help those to whom it is unfamiliar though. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 02:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

That one I won't oppose. In that case, yes, that'll be my request: to add the abbreviation template for those that don't know what "EP" means. Jalen Barks (Woof) 02:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Let's give others an opportunity to share their thoughts. I'll happily do the work when we're sure what's preferred  :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 03:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Sandbox version with suggested alteration Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 10:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC) -->

Example discography
EPs	yes

If no objection is raised over the next 24 hours, I will complete the job as discussed and shown by the sandbox example. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 01:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 00:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Please reactivate this request when consensus is achieved. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:37, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 9 October 2024

Change:

| label1  = Studio albums
| data1   = {{{Studio|}}}
| label2  = Live albums
| data2   = {{{Live|}}}
| label3  = Compilation albums
| data3   = {{{Compilation|}}}
| label4  = Internet albums
| data4   = {{{Internet|}}}
| label5  = Video albums
| data5   = {{{Video|}}}
| label6  = Music videos
| data6   = {{{Music videos|}}}
| label7  = <abbr title="Extended plays">EPs</abbr>
| data7   = {{{EP|{{{EPs|{{{Extended plays|}}}}}}}}}
| label8  = Singles
| data8   = {{{Singles|}}}
| label9  = B-sides
| data9   = {{{B-sides|}}}
| label10 = Soundtrack albums
| data10  = {{{Soundtrack|}}}
| label11 = Tribute albums
| data11  = {{{Tribute|}}}

to:

| label1   = Studio albums
| data1    = {{{Studio|}}}
| label2   = <abbr title="Extended plays">EPs</abbr>
| data2    = {{{EP|{{{EPs|{{{Extended plays|}}}}}}}}}
| label3   = Mixtapes
| data3    = {{{Mixtape|}}}
| label4   = Demo albums
| data4    = {{{Demo|}}}
| label5   = Soundtrack albums
| data5    = {{{Soundtrack|}}}
| label6   = Live albums
| data6    = {{{Live|}}}
| label7   = Compilation albums
| data7    = {{{Compilation|}}}
| label8   = Tribute albums
| data8    = {{{Tribute|}}}
| label9   = Remix albums
| data9    = {{{Remix|}}}
| label10  = Singles
| data10   = {{{Singles|}}}
| label11  = Promotional singles
| data11   = {{{Promotional|}}}
| label12  = B-sides
| data12   = {{{B-sides|}}}
| label13  = Video albums
| data13   = {{{Video|}}}
| label14  = Music videos
| data14   = {{{Music videos|}}}

I don't really know if would be considered controversial, but I think many users will agree. My suggestion reorganizes parameters to align with the general discography list. I suggest adding parameters for mixtapes, demo albums, remix albums, and promotional singles since these are very common place; Internet album is removed because it is only used on five pages and is unclear in meaning (doesn't even have as much as a redirect). IanTEB (talk) 14:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Seems like a good change to me. But I'd prefer those "=" symbols to be aligned! GanzKnusper (talk) 17:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, sorry! I just copied from the source that I could access. IanTEB (talk) 17:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Looks good to me. (and what is an internet album???) — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 18:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:25, 17 October 2024 (UTC)