Jump to content

Talk:Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs)
234,552 edits
m Archiving 3 thread(s) (older than 60d) to Talk:The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time/Archive 1.
Line 44: Line 44:


Because of this, we can't re-print large portions of the list, and limited it to the top 10. Also, adding just a list of the songs added really adds nothing to the article because of a lack of context. The casual reader doesn't know how these added songs ranked, or which songs were replaced. Because of that, the list should be omitted. -- [[User:Scorpion0422|<font color="#FF8C00">Scorpion</font>]]<sup>[[user talk:Scorpion0422|<font color="black">0422</font>]]</sup> 00:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Because of this, we can't re-print large portions of the list, and limited it to the top 10. Also, adding just a list of the songs added really adds nothing to the article because of a lack of context. The casual reader doesn't know how these added songs ranked, or which songs were replaced. Because of that, the list should be omitted. -- [[User:Scorpion0422|<font color="#FF8C00">Scorpion</font>]]<sup>[[user talk:Scorpion0422|<font color="black">0422</font>]]</sup> 00:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

:There is no problem with a diff list, since it is a multiple derivative rather than a single derivative. Further, it enables the reader to find added benefit to any single 500 list he can find, without needing to find BOTH and do a comparison. [[User:SkyWriter|SkyWriter (Tim)]] ([[User talk:SkyWriter|talk]]) 19:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:58, 1 March 2011

WikiProject iconSongs List‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
ListThis article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

what the what?

The top 50 songs from the list were featured and now some idiot removed them to only show the top 10! What's up with this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.22.253 (talk) 02:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NPA and then rephrase your question. --Jayron32 03:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but why were the 50 top songs removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.217.112.187 (talk) 02:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

I think the title of the article "The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time" isn't appropriate for an encyclopedia article. The way the title is laid out makes it sound like a definitive list, when it's merely the opinion of a magazine. Opertinicy (talk) 22:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The title of the article should be "Rolling Stone's "The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time", instead of its current title. Tøndemageren (talk) 18:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Song Genres Misleading

Why are Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone" and Lennon's "Imagine" classified as Rock music? What is in the least bit rock about either of those songs? They are closer to Folk and Pop, respectively. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.109.109 (talk) 09:25, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The songs added to the updated list

There were previous copyright concerns about re-printing the entire list here, which lead to the history of the page being restarted. More can be found about the discussion here. Personally, I think we should be able to re-print the list, since Rolling Stone has made it available for free on their website, but that's beside the point.

Because of this, we can't re-print large portions of the list, and limited it to the top 10. Also, adding just a list of the songs added really adds nothing to the article because of a lack of context. The casual reader doesn't know how these added songs ranked, or which songs were replaced. Because of that, the list should be omitted. -- Scorpion0422 00:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no problem with a diff list, since it is a multiple derivative rather than a single derivative. Further, it enables the reader to find added benefit to any single 500 list he can find, without needing to find BOTH and do a comparison. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 19:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rolling_Stone%27s_500_Greatest_Songs_of_All_Time&oldid=416607673"