Help talk:Adding New Songs

From Lyriki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Page titles

I'd like to suggest a change from the naming convention of "Artist - Title" to just plain "Title"

Here are the reasons why:

  • Songs are often recorded by various artists over the years. So doing Artist - Title can be misleading
  • If the page was just the name of the Song then it should be easier to find using the Search function especially if the first item on this list is true


The reason it's artist - title is specifically because of the reason you mention, with just title we'd end up with conflicts ;)

As well, just searching for the artist, or the song, does return a list of pages with that word in it. Try it :)

-Nanenj 12:28, 25 December 2005 (PST)

Yeah, we talked about the possibility of doing that, but decide that we'd run into too many conflicts. One of the major ones is that there are frequently multiple songs with the same name that are completely unrelated. one quick example: Both Disturbed and Prodigy have songs named "Breathe", and they're completely different songs.

Another problem is that even when a song is re-recorded by a new artist, sometimes the lyrics are changed slighly. An example of this can be seen in the cover of Metro (oringally by Berlin) that System of a Down did; the lyrics of the two are slightly different.

In the case of covers, it's probably best to just have a note on the page for whoever did the cover noting who did the original, with a link back to the original.

-Evelyn 12:26, 25 December 2005 (PST)

I suggest we move to KiwiLyrics's old naming scheme. KiwiLyrics is dead, so I'm sure they won't mind. They used the format "Artist/Album" and put all the lyrics from the CD on one page. However, if lyrics from different songs must be on separate pages, the format could be "Artist/Album/Title". This was a very effective method. -MindlessXD 15:36, 27 December 2005 (PST)

I'm not sure how that's much different then what we do have already. It seems that just uses a / instead of -. Is there any reason in particular that that's better?

-Nanenj 16:03, 27 December 2005 (PST)

It is better if a user can type "" and get all the lyrics for that album. As of right now, it seems that that style of URLs is disabled. I don't know much about running a wiki, so I don't know how to turn it on, but if enabled, this style works very well. --MindlessXD 16:08, 27 December 2005 (PST)
Another advantage is that when " - " is a wiki title, it's link becomes "_-_" which is much more difficult to type than a slash. --MindlessXD 16:47, 27 December 2005 (PST)
the type of url you're describing has to be configured in conjunction with the apache2 server (if this wiki is running on apache2) details can be found short urls Bailey 17:27, 27 December 2005 (PST)
I'll have Evelyn look into this :) That does make a bit more sense, and it seems like that'd make one of my secondary goals more easily done. (Integrating third party tools with the wiki.) Thanks for the suggestion. -Nanenj 22:02, 27 December 2005 (PST)
Replying to myself, but, something important. I -think- I've reached a semi-compromise on organization, and on making the URLs slightly easier, and will allow easier random browsing overall of the wiki. I think I actually had the idea when Lyriki was first formed, but, then shit happened and we had a long time of absence and I'd forgotten (mainly cause we weren't very organized) what direction I was wanting to head. Anyways, I digress. Basically there's the category functionality. Mindless has done very well setting up most of that, the biggest plus to that functionality is that certain 'index' pages update automagically when you tag the pages properly. Also, to get rid of the _-_ problem, I believe if you look at the Audioslave:Out_of_Exile (2005) page, that's an idea I had way back when as that entry is one of Lyriki's first. That rids the _-_ thing, and makes contextual sense with how categories on wiki's work. Please let me know what you guys think on this. --Nanenj 20:34, 28 December 2005 (PST)

One more edit on the above subject :). Bailey's link provides some inventive ways of using mod_rewrite, which we may look into. However, for the time being, the search bar on the left is immensely helpful for getting somewhere fast, as well as the artist table of contents on the main page. However, the decision to add year to avoid conflicts between albums and song names, does put a bit of a hamper on the usefulness of example as most people probably don't know the release dates of the albums, however, if the mod_rewrite stuff works, it'd be just as simple to do and then click the appropriate album. --Nanenj 11:56, 30 December 2005 (PST)

Here is an example that is somewhat like what KiwiLyrics had. It eliminates song pages by puting all the songs on an album on the album page. I'm guessing we probably won't go with this, but I wanted to show what it would look like. --MindlessXD 10:36, 31 December 2005 (PST)
Unless there's an overwhelming demand to move to that style, I rather like having the song pages seperate myself. To be absolutely clear, Lyriki is a service, and as such will do it's best to make itself the most useful to the people who want to use, IE: It's not entirely about what I want :P. --Nanenj 13:50, 31 December 2005 (PST)
I agree, but it seems we don't have many people around that want to give opinions. :( --MindlessXD 14:08, 31 December 2005 (PST)
I think that'll change, Lyriki's gotten a second wind, it was a bit neglected when both Evelyn and I had other responsibilities, not much was getting added and there was little incentive to take part. I've restarted advertising lyriki wherever I can, and have been devoting much more time to it, as well you've done a profound amount of work on the site. It'll grow and become more and more useful. Hopefully all the places I've been linking it from will cause it to raise in google's search ranks and more people will find Lyriki. I've also made sure to rate it in Stumbleupon so that random people will stumble upon the site. So, I think opinions will start coming in eventually. :) --Nanenj 16:38, 31 December 2005 (PST)

I'd like to make a suggestion for this type of discussion and others in general. It looks like over the past few months, some key layout and formatting decisions have been made. But, when I browse around, reading entries like this, I have a hard time knowing what's been decided and what hasn't. I'd like to suggest maybe, at the top of one of these types of debate-entries, Nanenj or Mindless encapsulates the final decision, then leave the debate as reference, so it doesn't reappear every ten weeks. Otherwise, newbies like me can't tell what's still up for debate, what's been settled, and what we are supposed to be doing. Does that make sense?

The final decisions should be reflected on the help pages. Which decisions are ambiguous? --MindlessXD 15:54, 20 February 2006 (PST)
Well, they probably are. I think the confusion comes from, I don't know when the actual help was written versus the discussion. So I can't tell whether the discussion is over and the help has been updated, or if the discussion is about the existing help page, and people are looking to change it. Does that make sense? Even just a final statement saying something like, "Since we seem to have reached a conclusion that it should be XYZ, I went and added that to the help page." That would indicate that the discussion is over, and sort of link the two pages together better. Maybe. --risser 06:23, 21 February 2006 (PST)

Signing Pages

Should users really sign artist pages, as the Help:Adding New Artists page implies? This seems very un-wiki-esque, if that makes any sense. --MindlessXD 18:55, 27 December 2005 (PST)


In a way it does, but, at the same time. The reason for signing, is mainly habit. It's especially useful on 'talk' pages, and it's decently useful any time there's multiple edits, just to keep track of who is writing what. I also like that people are credited for their effort in initially adding something.

It's also a 'recommendation' ;) Which means do it if you like, don't if you don't. I personally like that ;)

-Nanenj 22:00, 27 December 2005 (PST)

If lyriki is to grow, I think we will eventually have to prohibit people from signing their contributions, as does Wikipedia. Mainly because the names/IPs appear in the history and once you have 10 contributions (corrections) on one page, that't 10 signatures, which is just annoying. But hey, I just got here :-D--Orgullomoore 02:36, 28 December 2005 (PST)
Meh... I had forgotten to sign my question. :P I completely agree with signing talk pages, though. --MindlessXD 15:11, 28 December 2005 (PST)
It's very useful on the talk pages, me thinks ;). On the actual pages though, it's more of a sign if you're the one making the initial contribution. If you're simply editing a small bit, or what not, signing might not be recommended. I think on the Komm Susser Todd page I did sign something I added, but, it'd of been more appropriate for the 'talk' page on that particular song. :P Still learning a bit :) --Nanenj 15:25, 28 December 2005 (PST)}
On the talk pages we will of course have to sign...I neglected to specify that I was talking strictly about the pages in the main namespace (0)--Orgullomoore 01:14, 29 December 2005 (PST)
I wonder how far we'll go with this indenting thing... Ahem ;). Yar, as for normal pages, the idea from my point of view was just to sign the initial contribution, specifically on single album and lyric pages, the discography pages might have complete sections from people. More like, if you're adding something completely new, it's at your discretion to put a signature at the end. If you're just making a small change, correcting a typo, misheard word, etc, don't bother. --Nanenj 01:17, 29 December 2005 (PST)
  • no signatures- thats my vote on the matter. signatures imply ownership. as in "this is my opinion or view" which is why we sign on talk pages. Signing articles can come up as meaning that this is an article that was created by a single person, which in the end, it isn't. Bailey 12:16, 30 December 2005 (PST)
Perhaps you're right. I do wish there was a way to -easily- tell initial contribution however. I suppose the detailed history provides a way. Most seem not to like the idea of signing contributions, so feel free to remove the existing signatures (as well as edit anything that leans towards the contrary. --Nanenj 15:40, 30 December 2005 (PST)

Instrument Songs

If a song is completely instrumental, should it have a page? Or should the title on the album page be left linkless? --MindlessXD 16:08, 29 December 2005 (PST)

This is one of those that took Evelyn and I awhile to even get an initial direction on, for the sake of completeness, we decided that it should have it's own page, just because their may be additional info related to that specific song. Whilst the goal of lyriki is of course lyrics, we also aim to be as complete as possible in the information we host. If you've nothing else to add to an instrumental track, just make the page with a note saying such. Later, someone might drop in with who composed the tune, etc, etc, various trivial tidbits relevant to that specific track. --Nanenj 11:21, 30 December 2005 (PST)

Page Deletion Requests

Where do I make requests for page deletion? --MindlessXD 17:59, 29 December 2005 (PST)

I went ahead and made Category:Lyriki:Deletion for deletion requests. --MindlessXD 09:30, 30 December 2005 (PST)

Folklore songs

How do you handle songs where the songwriter is unknown?
For instance I would like to add a few spanish songs that were sung sometimes by the Mexican singer/actor Pedro Infante and the same song by Jorge Negrete. They are sung the same way with minor speed differences.
Other songs are written and composed by a few songwriters and musicians i.e Raúl Lavista and Ernesto Cortázar and sung by Pedro Infante or other singers. How are those entered?
I would like to add those songs, and attribute them to their correspondent artist(s) but don't want to create a chaos in the lyriki database ;-)
Somehow I would also like to add "Mexican Songs" as a genre or something like that, if it's possible

Some songs also appear on different albums:

One live example already in the database:
the album If We Could Only See Us Now contains the song Thrice:The Artist In The Ambulance (Live at the Apple Store) but the song only lists
Album: The Artist in the Ambulance

How is this handled? -- Robi 23:15, 18 January 2006 (CST)

In the case of the Thrice song, take a look at how Thrice:Cold Cash and Colder Hearts is done. You can link to more than one artist album from a single page. As for how to handle songs where the songwriter is unknown, I think there are a few possibilities. You could do a separate entry for the song under each artist, perhaps with a note saying it was also performed by the other artists (which is actually what I would do with Thrice:Eleanor Rigby, since it's actually a cover of a Beatles song), or you could do Unknown:Song Title, and then list the artists that you know have performed it. --Evelyn 22:00, 18 January 2006 (PST)
I think Evelyn's answered the question about songs being on multiple albums. If there's slight variations, note the variation on the songs page. The Mexican song question, I'm not so sure I understand the question. Typically I rely on creating links as if I could buy a CD. If I went to a shop and could by a CD labled as 'Pedro Infante' I would list all the songs under that, due the album-based organization we have. I would perhaps make notes if I had the information that it was written by someone else. You present good questions that we should be able to find an answer for if we aim to be a quality database of lyrics on the net. I guess my answer is the songs so far are only listed by the performing artist. Even if there are multiple performances, which I believe is what Evelyn was getting at when she mentioned Eleanor Rigby since it's a cover of a Beatles song. Both the Beatles and Thrice have performed the song. If it's a song that can't be placed as such, as I'm sure there probably is, we need to come up with a way to uniquely title these songs to avoid confusing collisions. Let me know what you think. --Nanenj 23:13, 18 January 2006 (PST)
Also, I missed where you mentioned Mexican Songs as a genre, is there something categorically different that they need an entirely different classification? Or would it be eneough if we made a Genre category? The only reason I've not even mentioned this before now is there can be alot of infighting in determining the genre of some domestic bands, where people get hung up on -what- type of rock something is. Or what exactly the definition of nu-metal is, or some such silly things. I'm not opposed to getting a Genre categorization and using that for indexing just like we do the artist and album alphabetic indexes via categories. I just don't want to update it myself. I could perhaps babble on a bit more, but, I think it'd be best to let others get a word in ;) --Nanenj 23:22, 18 January 2006 (PST)
<confused> Perhaps redirect pages could be of use here, but I'm not really sure I understand what the problem is... </confused> --MindlessXD 17:18, 19 January 2006 (PST)

adding lyricist(s)

I thought I should mention that there really should be a field to identify the author of the lyrics not just the person or group that performs the song. Quite a few songs have their lyrics written by a completely different person Bailey 09:11, 23 January 2006 (PST)

An interesting point, but, I'm not sure how many times I've had to look a song up by who wrote it? But, there's no reason that can't be extra information attached to the individual song pages. --Nanenj 09:47, 23 January 2006 (PST)
I'm interested in understanding how this might work. It would be OK for me to do this to a couple of the songs that I've inputed, right? --Nash 09:49, 23 January 2006 (PST)
Most definately. Feel free to experiment. That's one of the better things. The worst that'll happen is it'll look like ass and we'll try and decide another way of putting that information ;) --Nanenj 09:56, 23 January 2006 (PST)
If nothing else, we could use the infobox style that Wikipedia uses so that all the information would be floated on the right. --MindlessXD 15:29, 23 January 2006 (PST)
OK, tried it, but I don't know how to get the infobox on the right, which is the whole point of doing it. Please go to Come Together and see if you can look at the code and help. Thanks. --Nash 16:24, 23 January 2006 (PST)
I like that alot. Looks really prettyful. --Nanenj 17:09, 23 January 2006 (PST)
I changed it to a template. I also apparently should not be allowed to type after a certain time in the evening. If an admin can go ahead and delete Termplate:Song for me I would appreciate it. Bailey 20:36, 23 January 2006 (PST)
Thanks Bailey. I'd like to see it and be able to easily find it. Where is the template? Could we get a link to it on this non-talk page that we are kind of in now, the "Help:Adding New Songs" page? There's the one section called "Recommended Page Format" - Could we add one called "Alternate Page Format"? Again, thanks. --Nash 06:19, 24 January 2006 (PST)
Nevermind Bailey. After typing the above, I found it, your template. So, I've added the "Alternate" section. Anyone, change, edit, if you like. --Nash 06:25, 24 January 2006 (PST)

I edited the template to the more common usage of the hiddenStructure element. HOWEVER, I'm not certain it works because i can't view the Monobook.css file to verify if there is even a hiddenStructure element in the file. I took out the lyricist in the Beatles song to experiment and the label didn't disappear, so i don't believe the hiddenStructure element is in the css file. We need an administrator to add this for the template to work. Also in the template, what do you mean by "Credited to"? Is that the composer? Troy34 07:42, 4 March 2006 (PST)

Actually, it's not going to work until we get default values for parameters, which is in 1.6, which is still in alpha. --MindlessXD 07:47, 4 March 2006 (PST)
Ah, thanks Troy34 08:15, 4 March 2006 (PST)

adding categories for songs

Is there a reason why there don't seem to be categories for songs? I'm not saying that I/we have to have them, but it just seems odd that we have categories for artists and albums but not songs. Any thoughts? --Nash 09:01, 24 January 2006 (PST)

I've honestly thought a bit about it, just think it would get crowded awfully fast, but, at the same time. It would really help if every article belonged to a category. --Nanenj 09:45, 24 January 2006 (PST)


I noticed that there are a ton of songs starting with "The" on the 'T' page. According to the help, aren't these supposed to go with the letter of the word following "The"? I did this for a couple of songs I entered, but I found that then the songs titles aren't sorted with the non-The titles. That is, unlike the artist page, which ignores "the" when sorting, it displays songs with "The" at the end, under "T:". Can this be changed? (This is true with Album names as well.) --Risser 11:35, 16 February 2006 (EST)

OKay, I figured it out. In the category section at the bottom, the bit after the bar is how it's sorted. I would say, it'd be nice to see the albums and songs showing as <Title> : <Artist> instead of Artist:Title. It makes it difficult to follow the sorting and find what you need. --Risser 11:51, 16 February 2006 (EST)
Good eye. I guess the Bot that did all of the categorisation didn't compensate for "The" at the beginning. I'll get right on fixing it all.--268229 15:56, 16 February 2006 (PST)
Update: All song beginning with "The" have been edited to the proper state. I don't see any albums though beginning with "The" though, I assume someone got to them before me? =P --268229 16:23, 16 February 2006 (PST)
You really don't need to add ", The" to the end of the categorization. It makes little, if any, difference in sorting. --MindlessXD 17:29, 16 February 2006 (PST)

Clean vs. Dirty

I added lyrics for an Eminem tune that I have in 2 different versions, "clean" and "dirty" (though I prefer "album" and "radio"). I created a split-screen format that shows the lyrics side-by-side, which looks neat-o, but which may not be the best way. Would it be better to have 2 separate pages? Looking for feedback --risser 06:53, 21 February 2006 (PST)

I'm not sure we need the clean version at all, since the reader can usually guess which words are cleaned out. :D But I don't really know... --MindlessXD 15:13, 12 March 2006 (PST)
Looking at Eminem's discography, he only has one "Shake That", I say keep it as close to the original as possible. So only include the album version's lyrics, if there was a radio version on an album, then it would warrant for a seperate page.--268229 15:22, 12 March 2006 (PST)

I would say both are fine, but, not neccessarily needing a fancy view or multiple pages, just put one version first, and the other version below it. Generally, I would consider the album version authorative and should be the first listed. --Nanenj 15:55, 12 March 2006 (PST)
Yeah, you're probably right. Although, in some cases (50 Cent's In Da Club, the lyrics are actually different. Maybe just put them right in there with a note. Whatever. --risser 19:06, 12 March 2006 (PST)

Lyricist = Composer?

How often are the composer and lyricist of a song different? Is it often enough to warrent having both fields in the templates? Or could they be merged into one item? --MindlessXD 15:09, 12 March 2006 (PST)

I think they are different in many popular writing duos. Like, Elton John & Bernie Taupin, or Burt Bacharach and Hal David. But I don't really see the benefit for differentiation on the line. Just put Composer/Lyricist, or Author or whatnot. Because when I see Holland/Dozier/Holland, or McCartney/Lennon or Nesmith/Jones/Tork/Dolenz or Jagger/Richards or Goffen/King or Gershwin/Gershwin, which is which? I have no idea. --risser 19:09, 12 March 2006 (PST)
I think they could both be placed under either Composer or simply Credits. --MindlessXD 04:32, 13 March 2006 (PST)
Credits works, though it might also be assumed to be Producer or Mike Nesmith, Guitar or something like that. Composer is also pretty standard. I guess, if people know, they can include the lyricist, and if not, they don't. --risser 06:56, 13 March 2006 (PST)

shortening lyrics (chorus/verse notation)?

I've seen some lyrics on the site, that use [Chorus] or [Verse], or (#x); to indicate a phrase/line repetition, similar to that which the artists themselves use in their album booklets and such. I personally find these annoying and confusing (especially where the artist doesn't stick to the Chorus the second or third time it's referenced). So, I guess I was just wondering if there's any standard for this. I personally like the linear approach of things. If the phrase "raise hell" is repeated 4 times, then use raise hell
raise hell
raise hell
raise hell or if the chorus/verse is repeated, just copy/paste it where it should be and modify it if the artist changed any words around. --ahoier 08:12, 27 May 2006 (PDT)

The accuracy of lyrics is a key factor at Lyriki, so if a song does indeed have a slightly different chorus each time its used, feel free to edit it so it is right. Expanding the lyrics to the linear approach is a good idea, especially since some songs have two or more chorus' and it can get confusing ;) --268229 16:47, 27 May 2006 (PDT)
The "linear" approach was the standard at KiwiLyrics, and I think it should also be the standard here since it is much less confusing... We are working with a server where space is expendable, the artists are working with a booklet where it is not. --MindlessXD 20:33, 27 May 2006 (PDT)
Sounds good to me. I'll keep what I'm doing then :) and yea, that's what came to mind too :P Looking through this No Doubt booklet for Tragic Kingdom, a lot of their lyrics seem to be cut short...unless they just think people won't care for the other stuff (usually the end). --ahoier 03:59, 28 May 2006 (PDT)

different versions of songs?

What's the policy on different versions of songs by the same artist? Many artists have a differently recorded version of a song on a different album, and the lyrics are a little different.

Also, some pairs of songs may not have the exact same title, using Come On, Come On and Come On Come On by Smash Mouth from two different albums as examples (one song has a comma in the title; I've checked three music sites and they all say that one has the comma and one doesn't), which are also different recordings. Should there be one page for both, or one for each? We could even have one page for each and make a template for a small box at the top that would say something like "This song is an alternate recording of _______ from the album _______. Did you mean to find that version?" or something similar to that. Any ideas or suggestions? --Qhiiyr 21:40, 12 June 2006 (PDT)

Me and Ahoier have had similar issues with some of the Sum41 songs with Go Chuck Yourself and Chuck albums. We used the {{Song template (opposed to {{SSong ) to include both the albums and we decided to put the original studio album lyrics listed first.
hope this helps. - --Sidewinded 21:49, 12 June 2006 (PDT)
I'd recommend using a template like your example. If two songs have the same title but different lyrics, I propose appending " (SONG'S_ALBUM)" to the page title, if that makes sense. --MindlessXD 17:53, 13 June 2006 (PDT)
User:Attendant brought something interesting to my attention. Over at Evergreen Terrace:(Untitled Track) I was using 2 lyric tags, and titling each section to display the different lyrics (since that track appears on multiple albums). But yea, apparantly the lyrics plugin for Kamarok (I know I'm spelling that wrong..) can't cope with multiple lyrics tags on a single page. So, only 1 lyric tag can be on each page, and HTML bold and italic tags should be used within those lyric tags to seperate/label the lyrics. To see the complete conversation, check out my talk page. Perhaps we need to create another standard and/or template to deal with tracks that appear on multiple albums? --ahoier 07:34, 25 June 2006 (PDT)
I actually thought I'd addressed this in the decisions for our naming scheme once upon a time. Multiple versions of the same song by the same artist are the only times this becomes an issue, and in that case, you can simply list lyrics for the first version, then lyrics for the second version, and so on. So, from what I understand of the above, is that Ahoier and Sidewinded have the right idea :). --Nanenj 13:58, 30 September 2006 (PDT)

Plural in SSong template

When using the SSong template, it always says "albums" and "composers" in the little info box, even if there is only one album this track appears on/ one composer to the song. On the other hand, the lyricist always stays singular, even if there several people responsible. I'm not really understanding how templates work, though, so I don't know how (if?) this could be fixed. Anyone? --Notimeless 04:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC+1)

Hrm... I guess it was assumed that there would only be one lyricist. --MindlessXD 17:41, 4 December 2006 (PST)
I think the main concern, is the plural of "album" and "composer" even when only 1 album is listed. But yea, I've no idea about template coding and whether or not it's possible to change it so that if there's only 1 album, then make it "Album", else, "Albums". --ahoier 10:38, 8 December 2006 (PST)
Not without a lot of annoyances for users. --MindlessXD 15:06, 8 December 2006 (PST)
Well, we could always go for the catch-all solution of putting "Album(s)"/"Composer(s)" every time... --Notimeless 02:45, 9 December 2006 (PST)

Cover versions

Thought it'd be nice to be able to show when lyrics where covered by another artist. Created a new template called cover and set up an example on Nine_Inch_Nails:Hurt It doesn't look the best but it does get the point across and I personally find it fascinating to see all the artists who cover a particular song Bailey 16:35, 26 February 2007 (PST)

Hey, glad to know you're still alive. ;) We've got a template for cover songs and now we've got one for covered songs -- if you don't mind, I'd like to rename it to match the template we have (ie. Template:Covered by). --MindlessXD 19:18, 26 February 2007 (PST)
Hey Man :) Its the whole life,new job,engagement thing has been keeping me busy. Well darn I missed that or I would have done something different. Still don't feel that we've nailed handling covers correctly yet so I'm going to play around for a couple of days with different ideas, feel free to rename that template. Oh and I downloaded the WMP api kit to see about creating a plugin, if you guys are still looking, I should probably tell you this weekend if I'm going to have time to whip something together. --Bailey 15:38, 27 February 2007 (PST)
We're definately still looking, and even more so now. I've even considered offering up bounties on certain features that we could really use. But, considering those would be coming out of pocket, I just haven't been able to yet. --Nanenj 17:04, 27 February 2007 (PST)

Near-identical songs

I was recently working on the page for On Air by Alan Parsons, and it includes two songs that have the same title, artist, album, and year (namely, "Blue Blue Sky" as tracks 1 and 11). Despite the similarities, they're different songs - one is almost three minutes longer than the other. Is there a standard way to differentiate between these two? Lithium3141 05:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we have a policy for dealing with that situation. I'm thinking the best solution would be to put both the songs on the page and have give the two tracks under separate headings within that page. That way lyrics plugins for audio players can grab both tracks' lyrics for each track (instead of grabbing one of the track's lyrics for both tracks, which is what would probably happen if they were on different pages.) However, if you think another way would work best, go for it. --MindlessXD 20:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Parallel singing and markup

There are some songs where two different lyrics get sung in parallel. To give you an example: (starting at 2:30, until 2:40)
Terror is coursing in me
(Death inside of me, keeps a diligent watch on everything)
Dreading the final moment when I have to dream
(Keeps a terrible hold on my belief. Just waiting for the moment  when I)
And feel you die

The problem is that this kind of markup is already used for "answers" usually from an other singer. At least I found it on many lyrics. Maybe some kind of markup guidelines for lyrics would be great. This would also avoid the problem that some lyrics end up with lots of punctuations (a dot or comma at the end of a line isn't a good idea IMO, because you don't need them and in many cases they destroy intentional ambiguities in lyrics. I am sure there are more people who have problems choosing the right style writing lyrics. An uniform style would also make stuff easier to read for humans and maybe computers, if you try to parse lyrics for whatever reason. --Athaba 08:23, 17 November 2010 (PST)