Talk:List of artists who reached number one on the UK Singles Downloads Chart
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Btljs in topic Merging, deleting etc.
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of artists who reached number one on the UK Singles Downloads Chart article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Splits? edit
I've merged the "Most number-ones" and "One-hit wonders" lists into this article, as not doing so seemed to violate WP:CONTENTFORK. But was this the right decision? The article is now quite long and could take a long time to load, so would it be worth splitting these two sections into their own independent articles? A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 16:41, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Merging, deleting etc. edit
A Thousand Doors I put the proposed deletion to open discussion. This page has only been updated to January 2014 and I am spending a lot of time updating List of artists who reached number one on the UK Singles Chart, filling in the gaps and removing uncredited artists. I can see the value of a list of number ones, but as the two lists of artists are very similar, couldn't we merge into something like List of artists who have had number one singles in the UK and just tick which charts (download, sales, streaming, main) they topped? That way we're not relying on several pages being updated (which they aren't being) every single week and the differences (which are really what's of interest here) would be easy to spot. Btljs (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Btljs: I guess that could work. How much of the information would you propose merging though? The stuff about, say, most number ones or one-hit wonders or which artist was the first to have so many number ones, could that all comfortably fit into one article? A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 11:48, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
| Artist | Number ones | Date reached (weeks at) no. 1 | Notes | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Singles | Download | Streaming | |||
| 10cc | "Rubber Bullets"(1973) "I'm Not in Love"(1975) "Dreadlock Holiday"(1978) |
||||
| 112 | "I'll Be Missing You"(1997) | ||||
| 2 Chainz | "Talk Dirty"(2013) | 28 Aug (2) | 28 Aug (2) | Featured artist on Jason Derulo song. | |
| 2 Unlimited | "No Limit"(1993) | ||||
| 2Pac | "Ghetto Gospel"(2005) | ||||
| 3 of a Kind | "Baby Cakes"(2004) | ||||
| 5 Seconds of Summer | "She Looks So Perfect"(2014) | ||||
| 5ive | "Keep on Movin'"(1999) "We Will Rock You"(2000) "Let's Dance"(2001) |
||||
| 911 | "A Little Bit More"(1999) | ||||
- That does look pretty nice. My only concern is that, with that table layout, we'd lose certain information that's on this page (e.g. record labels, dates of reaching number one, weeks at the top, etc.) – do you think that information is needed, or is a little unnecessary? Also, what would be in the Singles/Download/Streaming cells? Ticks, number indicating how many number ones the artist had in each chart, or something else? A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 12:30, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, it's my crap attempt at table headings. It's supposed to say "Weeks at number one" and then each chart underneath in the header. I wondered about the record labels and dates as well but then I thought: could we link to the number one list pages, which have all this detail?
I'm going to try in the table above, so bear with, as it probably won't work!Btljs (talk) 12:36, 27 July 2015 (UTC) Seems to work.- Ah, okay. Linking numbers to articles about the chart could be rather unintuitive and a bit of an WP:EASTEREGG. Also, how are you planning to make each number line up with the respective single title? A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 20:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe. The alternative would be to put the date in the chart column with maybe no. of weeks in brackets: 24 Apr (3) But then how to show non-consecutive weeks? New line perhaps:
- Ah, okay. Linking numbers to articles about the chart could be rather unintuitive and a bit of an WP:EASTEREGG. Also, how are you planning to make each number line up with the respective single title? A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 20:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
24 Apr (3)
5 Jun (1)
The year is next to the song title so isn't needed again. I don't know about record label - is this something that is important? Btljs (talk) 22:56, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Probably not. There's no consensus that record labels must be included. It's something that I've already liked to include for reasons of comprehensiveness, but it's not something that I'd insist upon. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 00:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- They're still there on the number ones pages. I'll see how I feel after I've finished updating the main chart artists page. It would mean adding quite a lot of info to this going all the way back to 1952 since the page doesn't currently have any dates or number of weeks for each song (only a year) so it's a case of how easily this can be done using spreadsheets. It would undoubtably add value to the page, but it might be a lot of work. Btljs (talk) 11:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Probably not. There's no consensus that record labels must be included. It's something that I've already liked to include for reasons of comprehensiveness, but it's not something that I'd insist upon. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 00:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)