Template talk:Kesha

Right Round

I believe "Right Round" should be listed on this template, because Ke$ha was featured per the song credits. Just because Atlantic Records didn't want her name listed on the charts, does not mean she was not still featured on the song. It is due to "Right Round" that she flew into the limelight as quickly as she did, and therefore it is important enough to be kept on the template... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:27, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I also think it did bring Kesha to prominence. However, you're right, Atlantic did not want her name attached to the song. That means it is officially considered a solo song by Flo Rida, and what it is considered officially is what we should go with. Not opinions on what made someone prominent. Chase wc⁹¹ 00:06, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Last Girl on Earth

I've come across many artist navboxes, I've rarely seen (only Ciara) one where they put tour where they are supporting acts in them. Is it absolutely necessary to do so, if you browse through other supporting acts from Rihanna's tours, none (with the exception of Ciara) of course have them. The navbox should only include headlining tours? Fixer23 (talk) 23:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Appearing in the Kesha template makes it look like it is her tour IMO. It can be properly discussed that she is 'a supporting act' in the article text.—Iknow23 (talk) 02:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

We R Who We R

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

For the past couple of days, various people seem to have been adding and removing We R Who We R. So, let's have a discussion. If you believe that it should be added, please explain why. And if you don't...same thing.

Whilst we discuss it, please could everyone refrain from either adding it, or removing it.

Please see WP:DISCUSS for help with this. Looking forward to nice, clear, policy-based discussion below.

I hope we don't need to start blocking users for edit-warring. I suggest we all have a nice cup of tea, relax, and talk about this. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  16:20, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Of course! The properties listed at Wikipedia:Navigation templates are very clear: "navigation templates provide navigation" and "between existing articles". The "We R Who We R" article does not exist; there is no navigation there, so that defeats the purpose of a navigation table. Navigation templates are not lists and not discographies, but serve navigation purposes between existing articles. Also in the article is a bolded heading that says "Avoid redirects". I think the bullets here are pretty clear. Yves (talk) 16:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

That does make sense; thanks for explaining. I suppose the problem is, it seems a bit churlish that we list singles and do not list this one; however, presuming at this stage it does not meet the notability requirements (yet), then indeed we cannot have an article on it (yet), so it's a bit of a dilemma. How about adding it without a link? Would that just be silly? I suppose it would, in terms of a nav template. It'll be interesting to see what other people might suggest here.  Chzz  ►  17:25, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Well Wikipedia:Navigation templates says "Unlinked text should be avoided. For example, {{Axis of Justice}} lists non-articles under "Notable guests", but this content seems more appropriate in an article.". The single is already in the article, and it's not even released yet, so I don't see a reason for its inclusion. Again, the template is not a discography, in which the single can be found. Yves (talk) 17:29, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but the way I interpret the "Avoid redirects" part is, so that we avoid the problem where links-to-the-article-it-appears-on are automatically bolded instead of linked, in the same way that, for example, if I write here [[Template talk:Kesha]] it appears as Template talk:Kesha, instead of a link, like Template talk:Ke$ha would. So that is really a more 'technical' consideration, rather than a specific guideline for inclusion/exclusion, I think.  Chzz  ►  17:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I get that part, but the single doesn't have its own page, so it doesn't serve for any navigation. Template can't be FAs, but think of the most commonly visited and reviewed templates like this: {{Michael Jackson singles}} doesn't have the singles "Morning Girl", "Heaven Can Wait", or a couple of others. And {{Elvis Presley}} has only top ten singles, but the number-eight single "I Beg of You" without an article isn't there. Redirects and red links are just just, for the most part, excluded. Yves (talk) 17:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit request

{{editprotected}} Add a <noinclude></noinclude> between the pp template, please. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 01:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

done —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)