This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rave, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.RaveWikipedia:WikiProject RaveTemplate:WikiProject RaveRave articles
This 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Charts, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Record charts. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Record ChartsWikipedia:WikiProject Record ChartsTemplate:WikiProject Record ChartsRecord Charts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
A fact from List of Billboard Hot Dance Club Play number ones of 2008 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 September 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
I think the table class should be changed to "wikitable" so that there are visible borders. This makes it easier to line up (view) the date, song title and artist at once.
Oppose - Well obviously this is strictly based on one's preference for visual presentation. I do believe that certain things should be in a table (for example, discography pages with a bunch of numbers and chart information) but other things definitely should not (such as album track lists). To me, these pages look fine. And I question sometimes... does everything have to be in a table? Just seems like people are just sticking anything they can into a table when it doesn't really need to be in order to make it "pretty". Aside from this, there are so many of these pages, not just for the dance chart, but for the albums chart, pop chart, R&B, modern rock, mainstream rock, etc. etc. and not just for the U.S. but a lot of other countries as well. Are they all going to be changed too? - eo (talk) 01:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All of the data is already in tables, so the only change that would have to be made is adding class="wikitable". Adding borders doesn't make it pretty, it makes it more readable. - Tjwallace87 (talk) 02:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Just don't agree - I don't believe borders are needed; I find it readable as it is. - eo (talk) 17:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was on the Billboard website today and it listed the artist for this song as "Ralph Falcon featuring the Weather Girls", so I added the 'featuring' part and a wiki-link. I hope that's right. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 03:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I meant to do that and completely forgot.... the "featuring" part was added to the song credit like 2 weeks ago - it originally charted with just Falcon's name. - eo (talk) 10:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's interesting...so maybe I shouldn't have changed it at all? If the artist when it actually hit #1 was just Ralph, and the Weather Girls are added as featured after it's going down the charts, do they all still get credited with a #1? I honestly don't know. Maybe somebody knows somebody at Billboard and can verify that. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 15:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Song credits on the charts are not decided by Billboard - they simply go by what is negotiated by record labels, artists and artist management. Obviously there was a change during its run, so I think what you did is fine. - eo (talk) 15:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
