Jump to content

Talk:Megadeth discography

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured listMegadeth discography is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 8, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
January 20, 2009Featured list candidatePromoted
April 19, 2009Featured topic candidateNot promoted
May 15, 2019Good topic candidatePromoted
February 8, 2023Good topic removal candidateDemoted
Current status: Featured list

EPs, singles, Split-EPs and live albums.

[edit]
  • In 1999 Megadeth did a Split-EP with Ska-Punk-band Less Than Jake. That one is missing here!
  • Some questions, what are Live Trax I & II? - live albums or EPs?
  • What is Breadline? - EP or single?. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockk3r (talk • contribs) 18:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Live Trax is a bonus live EP for Cryptic Writings released in Japan; Same for Live Trax II: "It was only released in Japan and was sold as a bonus disc together with Cryptic Writings album in one package." "Breadline" is a remix single (promotional) and was released only in Japan. Cannibaloki 18:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No More Mr Nice Guy

[edit]

How come "No More Mr Nice Guy" isn't listed as a single? Although it had other bands from the films soundtrack featuring on the b-side it was still released as a single from Megadeth with solely Megadeth on the front cover. I know as I had it on both 7 inch and 12 inch records. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.213.52 (talk) 16:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hidden Treasures

[edit]

I added this release before, and it has been removed. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.120.121.246 (talk) 17:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Singles vs. other charted songs?

[edit]

What exactly is the distinction here? I'm confused. Is there a release-related reason that some of these songs qualify as singles and others do not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.119.236.119 (talk) 03:19, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of serial numbers and reviews

[edit]

I am keen to see the recent edit war between Retrohead (talk · contribs) and Lukejordan02 (talk · contribs) resolved. It's hard to pick out what the actual locus of the dispute is (that's why we like to encourage talk pages instead of just reverting), but from what I can tell the dispute boils down to this :

1) Luke thinks there should only be 10 reviews per album. Retrohead disagrees and states there is no limit.

2) Luke thinks CDs should not include serial numbers (but does not explain why).

Luke has quoted Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style, but that is a dormant proposal, not a policy and guideline. Furthermore, the text of the essay states, "A limit of approximately 10 separate charts is suggested, using any combination of country, component, or competing charts. There is no set inclusion criteria for which charts should and shouldn't be included, but a good rule of thumb is to go by the relative success of the artist on that chart." (emphasis mine)

The article is currently a featured list, which means it has been through a close peer review process to judge it meets a minimum acceptable quality. While Retrohead should not have edit-warred to emphasise this, he makes a valid point that changing the status quo should involve detailed discussion, so the article's quality does not degrade.

Based on these findings, I am backing Retrohead's version of the article. I'm not going to revert back to it just yet, though, as I'd like comments from everyone involved first, so that if I do revert later, I've got the weight of consensus behind me. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:04, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Retrohead

My personal opinion is that cutting three countries (which are major music markets) is not going to improve the article. All of the countries are properly sourced, and the guideline does not demand 10, but advices that there should be approximately 10→editorial freedom. The other editor has removed the label numbers from the albums (without explanation) and removed a few EPs on the basis that he thinks were not released as EPs.--Retrohead (talk) 21:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the 3 countries based on the recommendation of the being approximately 10 countries, I have since said on this users talk page that I am ok with keeping them if other users prefer it that way, which is why they are in the latest version, I removed serial numbers because I don't think they are needed, they don't help improve the page and some are missing, it makes the boxes cramped and I think the information would be best kept for the albums individual pages along with track listings. See Thin Lizzy discography for an idea on how tidy the tables can be without excessive info. Lukejordan02 (talk) 21:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"See Thin Lizzy discography" is not a valuable argument per WP:OSE. 13 is approximately 10 (basic maths) and if you think that label numbers aren't needed, that doesn't mean you have the right to remove them.--Retrohead (talk) 21:36, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I never said they aren't needed full stop I said they would be better reserved for the individual albums pages the same as the albums producers and recorded times are only on them and please stop with the personal attacks. Lukejordan02 (talk) 21:39, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, first up can we stop with the talk about personal attacks, please? It's not helpful. Now, down to content - I think the reduction of the chart colums from 13 down to 10 for space and economy reasons is a valid argument (though I can fit 13 columns when viewing Wikipedia through an iPhone in landscape, or 6 in portrait). What I don't understand, is why the specific columns are removed? At least one album had a higher chart placing in Denmark than any other country, so there's a valid argument for it to say. To be honest, I would probably see if there are other Eastern European charts available (since bands like Megadeth tend to be very successful over there), and if we can find, for example, Romanian or Ukranian chart stats, swap France and Germany for those.
I don't buy the argument about CD serial numbers - these can be useful if you want to quickly look them up on Amazon or eBay, say, to buy a like for like replacement. I don't see any aesthetic harm in leaving them in.
Thin Lizzy discography is not a good article to give an example, as it is not a featured list. I don't understand why there are specifically album chart stats for Sweden and Norway, but not the band's home country of Ireland! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:28, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For the last time I am ok with keeping the countries alone now and because someone might want to buy a copy of an album isn't a valid reason for keeping them, there is no harm in leaving them in but they make the tables unnecessarily cramped and untidy if anyone wanted to find the catalog numbers they would just have to view that albums article page. Lukejordan02 (talk) 08:35, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The trouble with calling things "cramped and untidy" is that is so open to personal opinion - for instance, I know people who call the OS X user interface "cramped and untidy" because they're used to Windows, even though OS X has received strong critical praise for its interface. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To summarize, we can keep all of the countries from the previous version. Now let's discuss the remaining issues:

Label numbers
Format on which the albums were released

I think this is useful because the reader might want to buy a copy of an album, and it's always helpful to know whether they are available on a CD, vinyl, cassette, etc. Okay, today all records are digitally available, but given due that most of these albums were released in the 1980s and 90s, this is a useful addition.--Retrohead (talk) 09:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree both of these can be useful information, but don't think that a discography page is the place to have them, same as track listings and producers. Lukejordan02 (talk) 09:56, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As the mediator already said, we should put aside our personal and aesthetical preferences. And what kind of track listings and producers are you talking about? I haven't seen them anywhere?--Retrohead (talk) 09:58, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, if I have confused you, I meant that the info of catalog numbers and formats should be reserved for the individual pages like producers and track listings. Lukejordan02 (talk) 10:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In my last post here, I wanted to say that this list would be part of my FA Topics candidature soon, consisted of Megadeth (when I get this to FA), list of members, and awards (already FAs). So, bear in mind that you are hampering my work here. The most constructive thing you can do is go and edit articles I'm not involved to. That way you won't be stressed and as RIthcie said, there will be no tears.--Retrohead (talk) 10:12, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a free site I can edit where I want as can you, Ritchie is trying to help and I appreciate that but you have an attitude an have personally attacked me multiple times. Lukejordan02 (talk) 10:19, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, please drop the "personal attack" accusation. It's true that everyone can edit Wikipedia, but all I'm asking for is a compromise. If you agree that the two issues above are important to stay, please undo your last edit. I realised by know that I'm dealing with an editor who wants to have it "his way". One advice would be to think twice before reverting a more experienced user (who has read all the policies).--Retrohead (talk) 10:26, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will drop the "personal attack" accusation when you stop doing them, and if I want it "my way" then you want it "your way" a and "experience" has nothing to do with it as new and old users can make mistakes and poor edits. Lukejordan02 (talk) 10:32, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but Luke makes a valid point here. You don't own Wikipedia, and the article quality processes must always put the encyclopedia first, and individual rewards and barnstars second. I can think of at least one incident recently where an IP changed something in an article I'd taken to GA, and was reliably sourced - but it turned out the IP was actually right and their edit stuck, although not before somebody had edit warred with them and an admin semi-protected the article. Because of that, we're down one potentially productive editor. Not a good result. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:38, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not my point, but nevermind, let's try it again.--Retrohead (talk) 10:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Serial numbers & albums format
  • Ritchie333, what is your opinion on this?
On the serial numbers, my opinion is - it doesn't harm to have them in. That means if they're in the article, great. If somebody really doesn't like them, I won't edit war over it. Therefore, I would recommend that you re-add them, but if Luke immediately reverts, you walk away from it and do something else. If nobody else reverts back to your preferred version, then that probably shows consensus that most people aren't bothered one way or the other. To be honest, I'm more concerned about things like this and this than what format a discography should take. I don't think there's much else I can add to the discussion, I'm afraid. The report at ANI is still open so we'll see what falls out of that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:54, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for all your input so far. You made a really constructive mediation. I can take the discussion from here.--Retrohead (talk) 10:57, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lukejordan02, why do you think the page should exclude these information (besides your personal opinion)?

I think the information isn't relevant on the discography and would be better to the page layout to include it on that albums individual page and not on the discographies page. The formats were incomplete in places and the catalog numbers were missing from a number of albums. Lukejordan02 (talk) 10:50, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, we don't have all of the numbers. But that shouldn't be a reason to exclude that ones we already have, right? If you check the Template:Infobox album, you can see that it doesn't feature a field where we can place the number. Do you agree? Furthermore, please leave a comment regarding the album's format.--Retrohead (talk) 10:54, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think the catalog number could be included next to the record label on that albums page and the formats are not really important like a filmmakers page has a list of films they have made but it doesn't include every-way to view them. Lukejordan02 (talk) 11:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you carefully read Template:Infobox album#Label, you can notice that "only the record label that the album was originally released on should be specified." This excludes your idea of incorporating the number there. I had already posted my thinking that this "is useful because the reader might want to buy a copy of an album, and it's always helpful to know whether they are available on a CD, vinyl, cassette, etc. Okay, today all records are digitally available, but given due that most of these albums were released in the 1980s and 90s, this is a useful addition."--Retrohead (talk) 11:08, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't see the point of the formats being included, Wikipedia doesn't exist to help shoppers but I agree the catalog number is important to have somewhere. Lukejordan02 (talk) 11:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to make a compromise and agree to have the catalog numbers put back into the discography page (along with missing ones filled in) if you agree to leave the formats off. Lukejordan02 (talk) 11:13, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that leaves us with only one option about the serial numbers—to have them here. I understand your position that Wikipedia isn't a guide for CD shopping, but don't you think it is a helpful information? After all, we don't know what kind of information the reader is looking for, so the best solution is to include what we already have.--Retrohead (talk) 11:16, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I will put the catalog numbers back next to the record labels, is that OK? And the formats information was incomplete like certain formats were missing and I don't really think it adds anything to the page. Lukejordan02 (talk) 11:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please take Ritchie's opinion into consideration. He said that he prefers to have them, so you should respect his opinion.--Retrohead (talk) 11:23, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Where does he say he prefers to have them, from memory I only recall him saying if the pages have them great if they don't no big deal. Lukejordan02 (talk) 11:30, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, he said "it won't hurt to have them", but he won't make a deal out of it.--Retrohead (talk) 11:37, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will make another compromise with you I will agree to allow the formats back if you allow me to add them and the catalog numbers individually so I can fill in any missing ones. Lukejordan02 (talk) 11:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By adding them individually you mean filling the missing ones? If that's the case, go for it.--Retrohead (talk) 11:56, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that's what I mean, can I ask you a question were is the best site or place to get catalog numbers from (I don't have the cds at hand) I need the catalog numbers for Thirteen and Super Collider and the latest 3 live albums, I will also add in the formats. Lukejordan02 (talk) 12:00, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The best source is to use the original CDs if you have them, but failing that, I find Allmusic to be the best source. The information has professional editorial control, so is generally considered reliable. Don't use things like discogs.com, as they are user generated, and may contain errors. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks, one more question (sorry to bombard you with questions all of a sudden) I'm going to add the formats what short title do you think should be added for digital download (Compact Disc = CD). Lukejordan02 (talk) 12:06, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bring this again, but where did the album formats disappear? They were more important than the label numbers.--Retrohead (talk) 12:08, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean where did the albums formats disappear? Lukejordan02 (talk) 12:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here we had the format field filled with either CD/cassette/LP/digital. Where is that?--Retrohead (talk) 12:12, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I seem I am adding them back in 1 by 1 like I did with the catalogue numbers so I can add any missing ones. Lukejordan02 (talk) 12:15, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:20, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:48, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:12, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:16, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:00, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Megadeth discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Megadeth_discography&oldid=1203959427"