Jump to content

Talk:List of songs recorded by Rush

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Commas, the

[edit]

Is this style really necessary for song titles that begin with the definite article? It seems to be standard practice to simply ignore the definite article for purposes of alphabetizing. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:11, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Taking another look, this list is chronological rather than alphabetical. Seems to make this style even less necessary. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The table is sortable, meaning one has the ability to search for songs alphabetically. Stylteralmaldo (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Warring

[edit]

There are three questions:

  1. How do neutral editors here define a "song?" Editor performing revisions insists an instrumental work is not a song, contrary to generally accepted vernacular on Wikipedia.
  2. If instrumentals are indeed deemed to be a "song" then are instrumental solo performances in a concert recording therefore also defined as songs, in particular when those recordings are named and tracked as such by the official song publisher on official releases?
  3. Conversely, if instrumentals are ultimately deemed not to be a "song" then is a wiser compromise to retitle the page so it maintains its original intent as a comprehensive list of a band's compositions, versus removing everything that doesn't fit the much narrower definition of a "song?"

204.111.238.28 (talk) 23:14, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:204.111.238.28 to Binksternet requesting third party assessment of inconsistent content moderation that also ignores generally accepted information about the definition of an "instrumental" as a "song" especially where this extremely popular band's history with them is considered.

Binksternet has reverted numerous edits on this page based on reasoning inconsistent with both content that already exists on the page and information easily cited and widely accepted within the community and the very publishers of the music in question.

The latest reversion (twice at the time of this comment) was to eliminate the addition of several *named* tracks from Rush's final live albums where those songs debuted live for the first time on these official recordings, specifically standalone guitar and drum solos. Binksternet's comment "instrumentals are not 'songs,'" "solos are not songs" and "nobody is calling a concert solo a 'song.'" reveals bias on the topic. This justification is both illogical and inconsistent as rebuttal below will attempt to explain

"instrumentals are not 'songs'" Instrumentals are most certainly songs in the generally-accepted understanding of the word. Even Wikipedia's own page on Instrumentals starts with the words "An instrumental or instrumental song..." Several of Rush's instrumental works have been Grammy-nominated under the category "Best Instrumental."

"solos are not songs" and "nobody is calling a concert solo a 'song.'" Second, live solos, a subset of instrumentals, are most certainly songs according to the definition above. CORE Music Publishing is the offical publisher of Rush's catalog and Rush's instrumentals including numerous live solos, are most certainly included. To be clear, we are not talking about instrumental passages within defined songs such as "Check out this guitar solo on 'Tom Sawyer'" or even "Check out that drum solo in the middle of 'YYZ' on the Exit... Stage Left album," but those songs which have been specifically named and digitally indexed as unique compositions, tracked individually as such in the official pressings of each album or video, or otherwise listed in the liner notes to highlight the standalone nature of the composition.

Inconsistency in content policing The page already lists several other songs that clearly fit the above definition and have been widely accepted as independent songs.

Historical examples of instrumentals already listed as songs on this page and widely understood/accepted as such: "La Villa Strangiato" "YYZ" (Grammy Nominated) "Where's My Thing?" (Grammy Nominated) "Leave That Thing Alone" (Grammy Nominated) "Limbo" "The Main Monkey Business" "Hope" (Grammy Nominated) "Malignant Narcism" (Grammy Nominated)

Historical examples of solo instrumentals from live albums regarded as "songs" "Broon's Bane" "The Rhythm Method" "The Rhythm Method 1997" "O Baterista" (Grammy Nominated) "Der Trommler" "De Slagwerker" "Moto Perpetuo" "O'Malley's Break"

New examples of solo instrumental songs added (and reverted, twice now) that fit the above precedents: "Drumbastica" "Peke's Repose" "Here It Is!" "The Percussor" "The Story So Far"

This seems to be hinging around certain editor's definition of what constitutes a "song." Other historical edits to this page show other such technocratic content policing including whether or not recordings made by the individual members of Rush belong on this page or if the page is intended to be "pure" and literally only include recorded material that includes sung vocals and recorded only when all members recorded under the band's name. This negates the purpose of a page such as this, whose intent is to centrally list the songs associated with a highly-influential band.

If Wikipedia is to police content to this level of nuance, it will find itself with decidedly little to say. Generally accepted norms should be accepted here.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: If adjudication ultimately comes down to the definition of "Song" then I recommend the page be retitled "List of compositions recorded by Rush and/or its members." 204.111.238.28 (talk) 23:14, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

204.111.238.28: what is your brief and neutral statement? At over 4,000 bytes, the statement above (from the {{rfc}} tag to the next timestamp) is far too long for Legobot (talk · contribs) to handle, and so it is not being shown correctly at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Media, the arts, and architecture. The RfC may also not be publicised through WP:FRS until a shorter statement is provided. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 17:09, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Above is important context to why certain changes were researched and added to the page, changes which are continually reverted by a partiular editor. To boil down the key points for resolution, brief questions for neutral editors:
1) How do neutral editors here define a "song?" Editor performing revisions insists an instrumental work is not a song, contrary to generally accepted vernacular on Wikipedia.
2) If instrumentals are indeed deemed to be a "song" then are instrumental solo performances in a concert recording therefore also defined as songs, in particular when those recordings are named and tracked as such by the official song publisher on official releases?
3) Conversely, if instrumentals are ultimately deemed not to be a "song" then is a wiser compromise to retitle the page so it maintains its original intent as a comprehensive list of a band's compositions, versus removing everything that doesn't fit the much narrower definition of a "song?" 204.111.238.28 (talk) 17:40, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our readers are well-served by having instrumentals listed at List of Rush instrumentals. We don't need to have any album track titles appearing at both pages—no need for redundancy.
A "song" is a poem set to music, or a piece of music that has singing in it. A much less common meaning of "song" is a piece of music "suggestive" of singing. I submit that a drum solo cannot suggest singing.
This article has always been too inclusive. Its title says "recorded by Rush" but Stylteralmaldo, the creator of this list, explicitly included "songs recorded by members" of Rush rather than just the full band. We should either rename the list or cut out the solo and duo efforts. Binksternet (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Refer to "proposed solution" above. The separate page on Rush Instrumentals can become either a subsection of this so the informational details about those instrumentals are not lost, or that page can specifically be retitled to be something other than a "list" since it is more of an analysis. 204.111.238.28 (talk) 18:24, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Every list article can be improved to include analysis. All of the Featured List articles have analysis. No need to change it. Binksternet (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be acceptable to write the description as such:
"This is a comprehensive list of musical compositions (songs with vocals, instrumentals, or individually named and cataloged guitar and drum solos) performed or recorded by the Canadian rock band Rush or its principal members, Alex Lifeson, Geddy Lee, and Neil Peart as solo artists or contributors to the works of others."
Explanation of changes as this: Clarified definition of "songs" in the opening description per discussion on the talk page to concretely define the intent of this page a broad, comprehensive list.
Is it necessary to edit the page title, and if so, how does one make that edit and how does one ensure bookmarks to the original name will still work? 204.111.238.28 (talk) 13:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not on board with that change, making this page hold all the music of Rush. But moving a page to a new title is done by established registered users by going to Special:MovePage/List_of_songs_recorded_by_Rush and putting in the new title. IP users can request a move following the instructions at WP:RM. I would oppose the suggested change to a wider inclusion criteria. Binksternet (talk) 14:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
{rfc} Referencing the earlier comment "We should either rename the list or cut out the solo and duo efforts" given that binary choice, and being the proposed change reflects the current content and the original purpose, explicitly stated or not, I welcome third party editor adjudication on the matter. 204.111.238.28 (talk) 20:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
{rfc} 204.111.238.28 (talk) 20:15, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lets use reliable sources to define words.
Webster's dictionary does not include a generic non-lyrical definition of "song", only
  • "a distinctive or characteristic sound or series of sounds (as of a bird, insect, or whale)", or
  • "a melody for a lyric poem or ballad".[1]
Dictionary.com is similarly restrictive:
  • "a musical piece adapted for singing or simulating a piece to be sung"[2]
Cambridge[3], Word Reference[4] and Collins[5] give similar definitions.
Wiktionary is the standout that allows for a generic:
  • "(by extension) Any musical composition"[6]
I'm not sure a fellow wikimedia project can be given as much weight as the others, so in that sense a merging of the two concepts, strictly defined, might require a re-titling.
But then again "songs" (plural) may have a more generic definition. Ask "how many songs are on Dark Side of the Moon?", one may expect to be told the total number of tracks rather than strictly those which contain lyrical singing. A merged title could be "List of songs and instrumentals by..." but then the WP:CONCISE version of that name may be "List of songs by...".
There are many articles which are titled with "songs" but contain wordless tracks:
I would also note that the "song" list article is a table, while the "instrumental" article is the merger of several singles-type prose articles, so a complaint of overlapping doesn't entirely apply. Wizmut (talk) 06:39, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_songs_recorded_by_Rush&oldid=1203688001"