Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Albums and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Shortcuts WT:ALBUMWT:ALBUM WT:ALBUMSWT:ALBUMS

	This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Albums This page is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum

WikiProject Albums was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 11 July 2011.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 3.

Any objections to adding The Tinnitist to WP:NOTRSMUSIC? It's a WP:SPS (corroborated by its about page), without, as far as I can tell, subject matter expertise. I'm asking here first because a surprising number of wikipedia articles use it as a source, so I want to be sure I'm not missing something. Fundgy (talk) 07:08, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm taking a look around, and the guy's track record doesn't look the worst. It looks like he's done interviews for the QMI Agency which have ended up in reputable sources like Guitar World (source, source) and Blabbermouth.net (source, source), and I found one article he wrote in the Vancouver Sun (source) and one at Rolling Stone (source). He was also quoted quite recently by the CBC (source). I don't know whether this classifies him as a "professional music journalist" which allows his blog to stand on its own, but I certainly wouldn't write it off immediately. Leafy46 (talk) 23:05, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Interviews seem to be fine. The Rolling Stone source you provided goes a decent way in establishing them, but I'm unsure if the blog itself has enough notability, particularly for subject matter unrelated to Canada, which looks to be their specialization. I wouldn't currently classify them alongside, say, a Christgau or Hull, and I don't know if they have any musical background that would make them more implicitly an expert. Fundgy (talk) 03:27, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] That's entirely fair. I would not be opposed to placing The Tinnitist in the NOTRSMUSIC list, perhaps with a stipulation similar to Fantano (though it doesn't seem like Sterdan shares his level of "street cred", from what I've seen): that the source may be used as an attributed opinion, but that strong considerations should be applied as to whether it constitutes due weight. Leafy46 (talk) 04:03, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Yeah, due weight is essentially my main concern. I suppose NOTRSMUSIC would be the best place to put them in a situation like this, for a lack of a grayer option. Fundgy (talk) 04:29, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Sources redirects here, so I assume I'm in the correct place; please accept my apologies if I'm not. Is Ultimate Metallica considered a reliable source? It feels like a overrought fan site, which would put it on the wrong side of WP:RS, and a search our own site wouldn't seem to suggest its used as a reliable source, but it's owned by Townsquare Media, which might(?) give it a leg up in possible reliability. What think ye? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 20:00, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at their authors, it looks like their staff overlaps pretty heavily, if not completely, with Loudwire, another site owned by Townsquare and an entry on WP:RSMUSIC. I'm unsure if special considerations should apply to what is ostensibly a fansite but is actually written by professional music journalists. Fundgy (talk) 05:58, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] What's your inclination? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 21:24, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] For objective content, I don't see any issues, as long as we consider Loudwire reliable as well, which to my knowledge doesn't has any outstanding issues to address. I would hesitate to use it for opinion on Metallica-related subjects though, since any website more-or-less dedicated to a band inherently brings up questions of bias. Fundgy (talk) 22:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Awesome, that works for me! Thanks for the assist. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 13:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article Aghibasiin-Lessons on How to Defeat Death has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged as Unreferenced for almost 15 years. Tagged for notability for 6 months. No other language has a reliably sourced article from which to translate. No sign of notability; only 1,500 copies made. Possibly redirect to the band.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 15:26, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Had a discussion the last few days with Bondegezou (starting here and continuing here) regarding Category:Guitarists from London, which I just created, and its inclusion in the article for bass guitarist Chris Squire. It hasn't been long since that discussion, but it primarily took place on Squire's talk page which doesn't seem to receive much traffic generally, so I'm not expecting anyone other than the two of us to see it there. So I want to bring the broader question here to settle the matter. Is it wrong for editors such as myself to include musicians primarily known for playing bass guitar in categories for non-bass guitarists generally, if the equivalent bass guitarist cat doesn't exist? Even when bass guitar categories are consistently subcats of guitar cats? Bondegezou says so, but I disagree (I think both of our specific arguments were laid out well in the prior discussion, and I ask that you read them from there rather than me attempt to summarize them here). The specific matter was settled here by my subsequent creation of Category:Bass guitarists from London, but it would be good to clarify going forward if I need to change my approach or if I had the right idea to begin with. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 21:55, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that specific category doesn't say not to include bass guitarists. Something I'm thinking of: what's the course of action for a baritone guitarist? It's the closest thing to a middle ground between a "normal" guitar and a bass guitar I can think of. It's obviously more of a hypothetical question, since I'm not sure such a page exists, but in this hypothetical I can see the argument for placing a baritone guitarist in a regular guitar category, in lieu of a more specific category. If that's agreed upon, I feel that logic might extend to a bass guitarist as well. Fundgy (talk) 01:31, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Additional note: currently, Category:Bass guitarists is a subcat of Category:Guitarists. Fundgy (talk) 01:35, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Is a bass guitar a type of guitar? Yes. Is a bass guitarist a guitarist? Well, technically, yes, but not in common parlance. Who was the guitarist in Yes? It was Steve Howe (or Trevor Rabin or Peter Banks). Who was the bassist in Yes? It was Chris Squire. If you said "Chris Squire was a guitarist in Yes", people would tell you you were wrong. Categories exist to serve navigation, not to be technically correct. That's how I see it. Bondegezou (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I see what you mean, but I don't think it's a matter of parlance here, but rather the precedent set by the existing category hierarchy. There's no "technically" correct here; a bass guitar is a type of guitar, and so it follows that a bass guitarist is a type of guitarist regardless of language specifics. And for what it's worth, four of the 10 players in Category:Bass guitarists from London with articles are referred to as "bass guitarists" first, and bass guitarist articles that I've seen tend to use "bassist" and "bass guitarist" interchangeably (as fits with the definition), leaving no actual distinction between the two. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:18, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I think it is important that we remember categories are a navigation aid, not a formal ontology. Bondegezou (talk) 13:32, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] And it's unhelpful to navigation to direct readers to articles about subjects who play instruments in the same family simply because the relevant terminology is (sometimes but not consistently) mildly different? QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:06, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I think to exclude them from the more general guitarist categories is being a bit too pedantic. With this logic, live/compilation/remix albums should not be included in general albums categories because when people say "album", most people think "studio album", even though the other types are by definition albums as well. Fundgy (talk) 22:55, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] If there's no specific bass guitar category, inclusion as guitarist makes sense.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 01:19, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Top Pop Catalog Albums#Requested move 4 January 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vestrian24Bio 09:24, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A music-related website, We Shoot Music, is currently being discussed at RSN here. Feel free to comment on the source's reliability there. JeffSpaceman (talk) 12:46, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is No Country for New Nashville (website) a reliable source? From the looks of it on their website, they don't seem to have any "about us" page or any other information, so what do you guys think? RedShellMomentum 01:49, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They look to be a website centered on Nashville concerts, so I wouldn't use them to establish notability. Almost all their most recent content looks to be written by Philip Obenschain, and it's unclear why that's the case. The only other writer I could find who has written for them in the past year is Drake Boling, who has no bio. Without an about page and very limited info about their staff, I'm not sure what their editorial standards or processes are, so I would be hesitant with this source. For posterity, it may be worth noting that their most recent post on their site was more than four months ago, aside from the occasional social media post. Fundgy (talk) 03:32, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cia Fellow Wikipedia editors in the Albums Project: It is wonderful to learn of your interest in this draft article Draft:Pietro Deiro Presents the Accordion Orchestra. As suggested by User:78.26 i have added a few references supporting "notability" h from a critical review in The Catholic Digest as published by the College of St. Thomas (University of St. Thomas (Minnesota) along with a few more references from the Discography of American Historical Recordings. I've also included a few more references to confirm the notability of the orchestral musicians who participated in the recording. While these references do not mention the album directly, they do confirm the prominent role which these musicians played in demonstrating the suitability of the accordion as a "serious & legitimate" instrument for the classical music concert hall stage in the early 20th century. (as indicated in the main article in Wikipedia about the Accordion in music (See the Section "The Accordion Orchestra in Classical Music). I hope the additional references are helpful along with the links to relevant Wikipedia articles on the history of the accordion orchestra in the USA. Thanks again for your kind assistance and best wishes for your continued editorial success on Wikipedia. With best regards ~2026-43837-1 (talk) 20:25, 20 January 2026 (UTC)NHPL P.S See a few of the additional new references here: [1] [2][3][4][5][reply]

Thanks again~2026-45691-1 (talk) 16:07, 21 January 2026 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

If you have submitted the draft for review, which you have, somebody will eventually review it. In addition it would probably be best to post to the Articles for Creation help desk for future support regarding draft articles. Rambley (talk / contribs) 17:41, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Ciao-Thanks for the advice. No problem--I've completed the revisions as based upon available references. Thanks again for taking the time to take another look! Enjoy the historical references and best wishes for your future editorial endeavors!~2026-45691-1 (talk) 18:19, 21 January 2026 (UTC)NHPL[reply]

I've noticed that when the question of album credits from streaming services are brought up here, Spotify is not often mentioned. I've been having a discussion over on my talk page with @JakeLaroi, where they're arguing that they're more reliable because (1) Spotify own 30-35% of the global streaming market share, compared to Tidal's .4 - 5%. and (2) Spotify pulls their credits from multiple industry databases, Internal DSP Metadata, and industry-trusted Third-Party Metadata Databases. Tidal relies mainly on label/distributor metadata, with no known integrations of large external databases to enrich their credits beyond what they were given. Even assuming both are true, I didn't think that's enough to establish Spotify as being more reliable, but I'm willing to be outvoted. Any thoughts? Fundgy (talk) 18:27, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Sock, who is one of the most active editors for sourcing personnel from streaming services. Fundgy (talk) 18:28, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Generally speaking, we don't need to source track lists in the first place at unless there's some sort of contentious aspect to it. The only time we need a source is when there's a dispute, or if its an upcoming album not released yet. Sergecross73 msg me 18:47, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] This album is a bit of a complicated one, because it was originally of a slightly shorter length. A day or so after its release, some of its tracks were suddenly appended with intros. I have no idea what version the physical media is either. I unfortunately couldn't find a source that gave the previous lengths. Fundgy (talk) 18:53, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Physical copy is a lot different than digital. Different outros, intros, transitions, and tracklist. Can’t find an actual source for this but it is true. JakeLaroi (talk) 18:57, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] If you're needing to cite things, then either would be acceptable as long as you're following WP:AFFILIATE. It looks like this is a pretty new release of a popular artist, so there's plenty of hope that some sources will start covering this better over time. Sergecross73 msg me 19:00, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] So it doesn’t matter if it’s Tidal or Spotify? JakeLaroi (talk) 19:05, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I've defaulted to Spotify for track lengths in the last few months. I can't remember the album for the life of me, but I remember adding credits from an album's liner notes and cross-referencing them with both Tidal and Spotify. Spotify had all of the tracks with the exact same length, while at least half of them were a second longer on Tidal. I've been adding Tidal sources to the track listing for the sake of writing credits, but it didn't even cross my mind that those citations would be assumed to cover track lengths too, and the lengths I add will virtually never match Tidal's lengths. I don't think there's a perfect solution, I've just been erring on the side of "add a source". If folks don't feel we need a citation in the track listing, I'm all for excluding them. Sock (tock talk) 19:15, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] My understanding is that covering track lists for music was comparable to the concepts of WP:PLOTREF and WP:PLOTANALYSIS for writing about fiction like films or television shows. Sergecross73 msg me 19:20, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I think that discrepancy might have to do with rounding. Part of my confusion that resulted in the original discussion was based on why should we opt for Spotify over Tidal for track lengths if we're using Tidal anyway for the writing and production personnel right next to it in the track listing template. A reasoning based on rounding is good enough for me, though. Fundgy (talk) 19:29, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is Earmilk (website) a reliable source? Their about page (link) says "EARMILK is an online music publication based out of the United States & Canada which has an international appeal with its top cities being major metropolitan areas all over the world; topping that list – New York, Toronto, Los Angeles, London, Sydney, Chicago, Calgary, Paris, Vancouver and San Francisco" and "*NO ARTICLES ON THE EARMILK SITE ARE EVER PAY-FOR-PLAY. Any branded content will be appropriately recognized for full visibility and article assignments are authorized by the approval of the Managing Editor or Senior Editor only". With this logic, I assume it's reliable, but what do you guys think? RedShellMomentum 02:39, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do they have an ethics/editorial policy? Who are their writers? voorts (talk/contributions) 02:41, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I have used them before on Natalie Sims. The team isn't listed anywhere but given the job openings and the mention of Managing and Senior Editors indicates there's some type of staff structure.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 13:27, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've come across multiple pages on Wikipedia now where the singles listed for the album did not match what was promoted or played on the radio. This is especially complicated when we're dealing with the pre-digital era in the United States, particularly in the 1990s and early 2000s, when many songs were airplay-only and had no commercial single release. It leads to an inaccurate representation of history, as certain releases are completely omitted. Then, there's also the problem of regional variation in the US, where some songs were released to radio only in certain locations (NY metro area, LA metro area, etc), but not released elsewhere, or one single was released nationally except in a certain region, where another single was substituted in its place. 021120x (talk) 21:21, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

At the Village pump I've proposed making the MOS:ALBUM an official MOS guideline: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Upgrade MOS:ALBUM to an official guideline.-- 3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 12:38, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An RFC is open regarding the plot summary of the album Act III: This City Made Us. Editors interested in the topic are invited to participate at Talk:Act III: This City Made Us#RFC:_Ending_of_Plot_section. PBugaboo (talk) 05:12, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some sources I'd like yall to discuss the reliability of:

1. Upset (2015-2023) OCLC 1064080731 (archived contacts page)

Former print and online magazine published by The Bunker, existed as a sister magazine to Dork and was later merged into it in late 2023. Edited by Stephen Ackroyd, deputy edited by Viki Sinden. Authors whom have written for/contributed to it include Ali Shutler (also associate editor: article example), Sam Taylor, Tyler Damara Kelly (example) and Steve Loftin (example). Albums rated on a 5-star basis ()

I would say Upset has a good roster. kelly has contributed to The Line of Best Fit, Shutler contributed to NME, and Taylor to Financial Times. But one thing is strange: I could not find any upset articles on Dork. Did I miss them or Dork deemed them subpar to preserve? In other mergers (The Guardian+The Observer/Louder Sound+Classic Rock) the the publications were eaten but their material preserved. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 14:17, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] @LastJabberwocky It appears the upset website https://upsetmagazine.com (archived) was taken down in september 2023 and now redirects to https://readdork.com/upset/ . Also from my own experience researching stuff, not all of the magazine's contents were web archived completely, though they can still be accessed via issuu here. // Chchcheckit (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] also print copies can still be purchased at https://shop.upsetmagazine.com/ // Chchcheckit (talk) 15:50, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I wouldn't say the articles are subpar, moreso that data costs money ig? // Chchcheckit (talk) 15:50, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2. Dead Rhetoric (2013-present) (staff page)

Online magazine owned, founded and edited by David E. Gehkle, who formerly edited Blistering and contributed to heavymetal.about.com and Metal Maniacs. He has also written several authorized biographies on various heavy metal artists/figures including Obituary (here), Scott Burns (here), and Death (here) Past/present writers/contributors include: Katarina McGinn (muckrack: deadname) previously wrote for several Australian newspapers, Bridget Erickson (example), Kelley Simms (example: has also written for Brave Words, here). I couldn't find a muckrack for content manager Matt Coe, although I did find this interview in which he claims to have written for several fanzines in the past. (note: authors are sometimes retroactively removed from credit and can only be found in archived webpages: this is nothing new, i've seen this at blabbermouth.net and consequence of sound; as long as courtesy searching is done). Albums rated out of 10 (i.e. 8.5/10)

Would both sources pass for WP:ALBUMS/SOURCES? I personally think Upset is an easy pass, not as confident (but hopeful) with Dead Rhetoric; you decide their fate(s).

// Chchcheckit (talk) 11:52, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Chchcheckit I think I've used Deadrhetoric before--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 15:42, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the boring request. The Last Christmas article has been sitting with a "duplicated references" tag for a while. I've tried to fix this but when I dig into the source I can't find the duplicated references and this is the kind of Wikipedia work that makes me glaze over. Is anyone able to help? Popcornfud (talk) 14:10, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm taking a look at it now, I find it best to ctrl+f the URLs from the maintenance tag to find them... if they are still there. People may fix things without touching the maintenance tag. Rfl0216 (talk) 20:09, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Thanks a bunch! I only tried to fix a couple of the references and couldn't see where they were duplicated. Now I see the problem is that they weren't duplicated. I thought they were just buried in some template I couldn't figure out. Popcornfud (talk) 22:12, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Utopia (Gwenno Saunders album)#Requested move 26 January 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPathtalk 09:22, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am involved in a content dispute on Evanescence's debut album and am requesting further feedback from the community. mftp dan oops 14:20, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If anybody want to participate on the discussion here about the highest-grossing tour of 2025. Bluesatellite (talk) 16:09, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested in commenting on a proposed approach to adding anchors to numbered sub-items in this policy, please join the discussion here: Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)#Anchors. Thanks! WidgetKid chat me 22:32, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion about this back in Jan 2024 that reached no conclusion. This has continued to bug the hell out of me and I'd like to resolve it.

Consider these article titles:

• Zombie (The Cranberries song)
• Friend of a Friend (The Smile song)
• The Moment of Truth (The Real Milli Vanilli album)

These are all incorrectly capitalized. The "The" before the band name should be lowercase, like this:

• Zombie (the Cranberries song)
• Friend of a Friend (the Smile song)
• The Moment of Truth (the Real Milli Vanilli album)

In fact, there should probably be no "the" at all, like this:

• Zombie (Cranberries song)
• Friend of a Friend (Smile song)
• The Moment of Truth (Real Milli Vanilli album)

This is for the following reasons:

• Per MOS:THEBAND, we do not capitalize definite article ("the") in band names. So we write the Beatles, not The Beatles.
• The fact that the names are placed in parentheses doesn’t change anything. For example, we have articles titled "White Christmas (song)", not "White Christmas (Song)"; "David Mitchell (author)", not "David Mitchel (Author)"; "Mercury (planet)", not "Mercury (Planet)" etc.
• These are fragments, not sentences, so arguments about capitalizing the first letter of the sentence do not apply.

We have hundreds or thousands of articles with this problem. The current naming is contrary to Wikipedia manual of style and we need to fix it. Popcornfud (talk) 14:47, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding was that THEBAND applied to article prose, not article titling. I say this more as an observer, than a participant, as I don't care that much (though I also see little conceptual benefit to "fixing" this either.) Sergecross73 msg me 15:10, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] The benefit of fixing it is the same as any other MOS fix: to be consistent with the MOS. So the question is whether I'm right in my interpretation of the MOS and how it applies here. If we say WP:THEBAND only applies to article prose, that would presumably mean we would cap "The" everywhere else, such as in shortdescs ("1965 album by The Beatles"?), infoboxes ("Album by The Beatles"?), and article titles in general, not just disambiguation parentheses ("Bob Marley and The Wailers"?) ... I don't see the logic in that. Popcornfud (talk) 17:05, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Popcornfud: I'd love to see this resolved. I understand it as you do and I'd like to see it treated uniformly through Wikipedia, but I've seen requested moves go against it. A decision here would help resolve that. I also think your final point using the example "Zombie (Cranberries song)" should be made the norm too. Nobody says "I love that the Zombies song", so we shouldn't use that unnatural language in our titles. SchreiberBike | ⌨  17:16, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] My understanding that THEBAND was largely rectifying the awkwardness of having a capitalized "The" in the middle of sentences. ("Johnson posited 'Untitled' was the best The Smashing Pumpkins song." sort of stuff.) No such awkwardness exists at a page title like Untitled (The Smashing Pumpkins song), with it just being a name sectioned off with parentheses. Sergecross73 msg me 17:51, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] IMO, it's extremely awkward, because it would be simply wrong to capitalize "the" for any other type of noun in this situation. In fact, we probably wouldn't write "the" here at all, as SchreiberBike mentions (see MOS:THENAME). So why do we make this exception just for band names just in parenthesis just in article titles? If you don't find it awkward, I can't convince you to have that feeling about it, but I'm hoping you can at least see that it's inconsistent. Popcornfud (talk) 18:26, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Support proposal. "Zombie (Cranberries song)" is the most intuitive. I would also make the "T/the" variants be redirects (e.g. "Zombie (the Cranberries song)", "Zombie (The Cranberries song)"). WidgetKid chat me 19:22, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has requested that DTMF (disambiguation) be moved to DTMF, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 19:26, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]