Template talk:Single chart

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Single chart template.

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

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Record Charts This template 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.

To-do list for Template:Single chart: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2021-12-23 Long term Complete rewrite to minimize duplication and simplify maintenance Better test cases with regular systematic checks for dead links Medium term Add support for date formatting based on {{use dmy dates}} and similar Compare the list of supported charts with WP:GOODCHARTS Go through all documentation ensuring it's up to date Short term Migrate Irish1 to Irish2, Irish3 or Irish4 after Chart Track stopped working

TopHit update

Latest comment: 2 months ago45 comments3 people in discussion

As you know, TopHit updated its interface more than a year ago. I suggest this code for the template:

 
|Russia
|Russian
|Russianairplay={{!}}{{#if:{{{date|}}}|Russia Airplay ([[TopHit]])|{{main other|[[Category:Single chart used with missing parameters]]}}<span style="color:red;">ERROR: MUST PROVIDE date FOR Russian CHART</span>}}{{#tag:ref|"[https://tophit.com/chart/top/radio/hits/ru/weekly/{{{date}}} Top Radio Hits Russia Weekly Chart]." [[TopHit]]. {{#if:{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate|}}}}}}|{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate}}}}}}. }} {{#if:{{{access-date|{{{accessdate|}}}}}}| Retrieved {{{access-date|{{{accessdate}}}}}}. }}|name={{#if:{{{refname|}}}|{{{refname}}}|"sc_{{trim|{{{1|}}}}}_{{{artist|}}}"}}|group={{#if:{{{refgroup|}}}| "{{{refgroup}}}"}}}} {{Single chart/chartnote|{{{note|}}}}}

But now it will be necessary to use the publication date of the chart in the articles.

 
{{single chart|Russia|1|date=20250418-20250424|publish-date=April 24, 2025|rowheader=true|access-date=April 28, 2025}}

If so, here is a similar one for other countries published by TopHit that do not have alternative charts.

 
|Belarus={{!}}{{#if:{{{date|}}}|Belarus Airplay ([[TopHit]])|{{main other|[[Category:Single chart used with missing parameters]]}}<span style="color:red;">ERROR: MUST PROVIDE date FOR Belarusian CHART</span>}}{{#tag:ref|"[https://tophit.com/chart/top/radio/hits/by/weekly/{{{date}}} Top Radio Hits Belarus Weekly Chart]." [[TopHit]]. {{#if:{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate|}}}}}}|{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate}}}}}}. }} {{#if:{{{access-date|{{{accessdate|}}}}}}| Retrieved {{{access-date|{{{accessdate}}}}}}. }}|name={{#if:{{{refname|}}}|{{{refname}}}|"sc_{{trim|{{{1|}}}}}_{{{artist|}}}"}}|group={{#if:{{{refgroup|}}}| "{{{refgroup}}}"}}}} {{Single chart/chartnote|{{{note|}}}}}

|Estonia={{!}}{{#if:{{{date|}}}|Estonia Airplay ([[TopHit]])|{{main other|[[Category:Single chart used with missing parameters]]}}<span style="color:red;">ERROR: MUST PROVIDE date FOR Estonian CHART</span>}}{{#tag:ref|"[https://tophit.com/chart/top/radio/hits/ee/weekly/{{{date}}} Top Radio Hits Estonia Weekly Chart]." [[TopHit]]. {{#if:{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate|}}}}}}|{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate}}}}}}. }} {{#if:{{{access-date|{{{accessdate|}}}}}}| Retrieved {{{access-date|{{{accessdate}}}}}}. }}|name={{#if:{{{refname|}}}|{{{refname}}}|"sc_{{trim|{{{1|}}}}}_{{{artist|}}}"}}|group={{#if:{{{refgroup|}}}| "{{{refgroup}}}"}}}} {{Single chart/chartnote|{{{note|}}}}}

|Kazakhstan={{!}}{{#if:{{{date|}}}|Kazakhstan Airplay ([[TopHit]])|{{main other|[[Category:Single chart used with missing parameters]]}}<span style="color:red;">ERROR: MUST PROVIDE date FOR Kazakh CHART</span>}}{{#tag:ref|"[https://tophit.com/chart/top/radio/hits/kz/weekly/{{{date}}} Top Radio Hits Kazakhstan Weekly Chart]." [[TopHit]]. {{#if:{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate|}}}}}}|{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate}}}}}}. }} {{#if:{{{access-date|{{{accessdate|}}}}}}| Retrieved {{{access-date|{{{accessdate}}}}}}. }}|name={{#if:{{{refname|}}}|{{{refname}}}|"sc_{{trim|{{{1|}}}}}_{{{artist|}}}"}}|group={{#if:{{{refgroup|}}}| "{{{refgroup}}}"}}}} {{Single chart/chartnote|{{{note|}}}}}

|Moldova={{!}}{{#if:{{{date|}}}|Moldova Airplay ([[TopHit]])|{{main other|[[Category:Single chart used with missing parameters]]}}<span style="color:red;">ERROR: MUST PROVIDE date FOR Moldavian CHART</span>}}{{#tag:ref|"[https://tophit.com/chart/top/radio/hits/md/weekly/{{{date}}} Top Radio Hits Moldova Weekly Chart]." [[TopHit]]. {{#if:{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate|}}}}}}|{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate}}}}}}. }} {{#if:{{{access-date|{{{accessdate|}}}}}}| Retrieved {{{access-date|{{{accessdate}}}}}}. }}|name={{#if:{{{refname|}}}|{{{refname}}}|"sc_{{trim|{{{1|}}}}}_{{{artist|}}}"}}|group={{#if:{{{refgroup|}}}| "{{{refgroup}}}"}}}} {{Single chart/chartnote|{{{note|}}}}}

|Ukraine
|Ukrainian 
|Ukraineairplay={{!}}{{#if:{{{date|}}}|Ukraine Airplay ([[TopHit]])|{{main other|[[Category:Single chart used with missing parameters]]}}<span style="color:red;">ERROR: MUST PROVIDE date FOR Ukrainian CHART</span>}}{{#tag:ref|"[https://tophit.com/chart/top/radio/hits/ua/weekly/{{{date}}} Top Radio Hits Ukraine Weekly Chart]." [[TopHit]]. {{#if:{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate|}}}}}}|{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate}}}}}}. }} {{#if:{{{access-date|{{{accessdate|}}}}}}| Retrieved {{{access-date|{{{accessdate}}}}}}. }}|name={{#if:{{{refname|}}}|{{{refname}}}|"sc_{{trim|{{{1|}}}}}_{{{artist|}}}"}}|group={{#if:{{{refgroup|}}}| "{{{refgroup}}}"}}}} {{Single chart/chartnote|{{{note|}}}}}

Sanslogique (talk) 14:10, 28 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

It is worth replacing "Airplay" with "Radio Hits", as this is the actual name of the chart in all such cases. Solidest (talk) 16:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Sanslogique We discussed the technical and reliability issues with the Russian chart here. The solution we arrived at was that |date= remains mandatory, while if |chartid= is present, the template will understand that this is the second incarnation of the TopHit charts and if it is not present, it will revert to the first incarnation. I don't see this anywhere in the code.
As for counties that do not have alternative charts, I think this could be implemented into the sandbox and tested, right after the changes Solidest made above are incorporated, most likely this weekend. Muhandes (talk) 13:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Sanslogique: Are you still interested in this? You did not answer my question. Muhandes (talk) 09:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Of course I'm interested in this, otherwise I wouldn't have started this topic. Sanslogique (talk) 13:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Sanslogique: Well then, you didn't address my respond above. Let me repeat it. The solution we arrived at was that |date= remains mandatory, while if |chartid= is present, the template will understand that this is the second incarnation of the TopHit charts and if it is not present, it will revert to the first incarnation. I don't see this anywhere in the code.
I would add that the other regions should probably follow that pattern, in the sense that they should require both |date= remains mandatory, while if |chartid=. I don't know if this makes sense, it will depend on the implementation. Muhandes (talk) 10:20, 16 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

I consider the format I have proposed to be optimal. The dates entered in the templates before the update won't work anyway, and there's nothing you can do about it. I do not suggest using (|chartid=), but simply (|publish-date=) to indicate the date in the note. In older versions of the template in articles, you can manually correct the date by searching for it on tophit. Sanslogique (talk) 13:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC) UPD Is it possible to include a Russian streaming chart in the template? (Discussion).--Sanslogique (talk) 15:46, 16 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Sanslogique The proposed solution would render 400 instances of the template unsourced, which I think is unacceptable. Muhandes (talk) 17:52, 17 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

I missed the earlier discussion, but having two charts under a single name seems overly complicated to me. If we want to keep both versions, I'd suggest renaming the old one to "Russiaold" and showing only archived links for it (or keep it as is - "Russia", but it will probably cause erroneous fills). Then we could add the new chart as "Russiaradio", along with the requested "Russiastreaming".

That said, I agree it would be preferable to simply replace the old version with the new one, to avoid unnecessary complications, stop storing potentially incorrect/deprecated data from that site, and prioritize up-to-date, sourced information. I don't think it would be difficult for bot maintainers to replace the old dates with the new ones, since the logic seems consistent: the old date is always Monday, while the new range runs from Friday to Friday (−3 to +4 days). The new entries could be checked manually after the replacement — or I could try scraping this data as well. Recalculations don't seem to happen constantly, but it's hard to say how common they are. UPD: I've thoroughly checked, and it looks like date= can be any day of the week, and the chart positions are always changing. Solidest (talk) 03:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest: It's not that I want to keep both versions. This has nothing with what I want. We have 400 articles using this version. If we remove the old version, we end up with 400 articles with unsourced material, or, even worse, pointing to a source that never existed and a position that does not match what the article says. This is unacceptable. I see your answer below addresses some of it and I will respond there. Muhandes (talk) 08:29, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Good news, I think I made a script that can entirely update all the charts to new IDs and get new chart positions from the site automatically. So it seems to me that the most optimal option is to add a new chart "Russiaradio", I'll replace all the chart uses and then we delete the deprecated "Russia" chart from the code. Solidest (talk) 05:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest: good news indeed. I'm not sure how exactly you are going to do that, considering the peak on the new chart is not necessarily on the same week, month or year of the peak on the old chart, but I presume you address this. Also, some songs have peaks on the old chart do not chart at all on the new chart, but I presume there are only a few of those and you can handle them manually. A remaining problem is articles which refer to those peaks in the article body through named references, using the |refname= parameter. If you create a list of articles using the |refname= parameter, you can check them manually and correct them. I presume there are not many of them but I have no way of telling. I will add the new chart so you can start running your script. Muhandes (talk) 08:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

I've checked a couple of dozen songs and haven’t found any cases where the peak moved to a completely different week, month, or year. In all the cases I checked, the peak still falls within the same chart week (running from Friday to Thursday). So I simply recalculate the new date range from the prepared data set based on the old date and manually approving the peak positions change. And also collect the artist name and song title from the site. Do you have any specific examples where the peak shifted to a completely different week or month compared to the old data? Maybe it's because the old chart in the article was already outdated? In most cases, peaks shift by just 2–3 positions, though in some they move by several dozen — but even then, the old date still falls within the new chart week. Solidest (talk) 08:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

I remember that when this was introduced, the first three songs I checked were enough to show all three options - a different peak, a peak on a different weak and no peak at all. This is especially true for songs at the end of the chart, such that with the new chart they may never enter, or may enter a week later. I will try to provide examples. Muhandes (talk) 09:05, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

This first song I tried, Flames (R3hab, Zayn and Jungleboi song), shows the problem. The old peak is 36 at 2019-12-30. The new peak is a 37 at the next year. I'm not sure how a script is going to find that.
ETA: I thought you might be able to grab the peak from the artist page, but I don't see how. the song page is not much help either. Muhandes (talk) 09:41, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

I've refined the script, now it takes the old date as a starting point and then checks all the following weeks one by one until the song disappears from the charts, and then all the previous weeks. And then at the end it picks the lowest number (highest peak) it can find. I think it should work for 98% of cases, except for obscure ones when songs left the chart and came back again (these cases are probably not relevant for the script and should be treated as usual chart update) or when a song fell out of the charts due to site update - the script will also skip these cases and we will need to manually check them. And also the script will end with a list of cases where refname/refgroup was used. If there are not too many of them, I'll fix them myself, otherwise I will post them here. 10:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Btw, I saw you added it as Russia2 to sandbox. I think it's not a good idea when the only working variant for the country gonna be the one with the number 2, so we should avoid it right away given, as we now assume that the old variant will be deleted after replacements. And by the way, Airplay name should also be changed to 'Radio Hits' as I wrote it before. Or is Airplay chosen deliberately for standardization? Streaming charts on the site are also called 'Internet Hits'. Solidest (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest: Apologies for the delayed response — I was busy enjoying an extended hospital stay. It's standard practice (we’ve done it four or five times already) to replace a defunct chart with a new one using a two-step process. First, we replace every instance of "Russia" with "Russia2" through some automated or semi-automated process. Once that’s done, we run a quick bot pass to finalize the switch — replacing "Russia2" with "Russia" and removing the option for the older citation. This ensures consistent sourcing throughout. The sandbox is now live and we have the options for Russia2, Estonia, Kazakhstan and Moldova (Pinging Sanslogique). You can now run your script, replacing Russia with Russia2, and let us know how it work.
By the way, Ukraine seems to be in a similar situation. We can do that at a later date. Muhandes (talk) 08:34, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I mean, why don't we just add the final RussiaRadio + RussiaInternet charts right away? And the same goes for Ukraine. Solidest (talk) 14:53, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest: If you mean replacing the existing one, that would mean 400 articles will have wrong sources, which is unacceptable. Muhandes (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

No, I mean adding these two as new IDs. I'll replace the values from "Russia" to "Russiaradio" using the script, and then we'll simply delete the "Russia" chart and keep both "Russiaradio" and "Russiainternet". It's a similar situation to Hungary, where "Hungaryradio" became the main name instead of just "Hungary", because there are also "Hungarysingle", "Hungarystreaming", etc. I'm not sure we need to keep "Russia" (or maybe we still should?), and I don't see the need to temporarily add "Russia2" when we can go straight to the final, more precise names. Solidest (talk) 17:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Russia needs to stay until the 400-ish instances are replaced with something else. Once this is done, it can be removed. We don't have Russiainternet and no one asked for it, so I'm not sure why you mention it. If you prefer to use Russiaradio over Russia2, I don't oppose, but since this is the only chart for Russia, there is no need to use "radio" in the name. Muhandes (talk) 18:32, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Sanslogique asked about streaming/internet chart here. Solidest (talk) 18:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I missed that. I changed the Russia2 to Russiaradio. Muhandes (talk) 12:57, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Also, above it was discussed that the date range (20130118-20130124) should be filled in chartid=, but now in the code it is filled in date=. Is this correct? Solidest (talk) 15:30, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I originally suggested using |chartid= to bridge the old and new website formats. Since you’re now planning to fully replace the older format, it’s no longer needed. Muhandes (talk) 15:40, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I made 20 test edits. Overall, there don't seem to be any critical issues, except for a few isolated cases where the site previously displayed incorrect data that was added to articles, and later updated the chart entries. For example:

• [1] — previously, the site listed the track as “40 Degrees” at position 56, but now, for the same week, only “40 Degrees (Alex Ortega & Ivan Demsoff Remix)” appears at position 96. It doesn’t appear to be a case of two different tracks being listed — the original track is no longer present on the website at all, which suggests that the site simply corrected the data.
• [2] — previously, 2Pac’s “All Eyez on Me” appeared at position 22; now it lists a remix by DJ Dark & Mentol titled “All Eyez On Me (Gangsta Mix)” at position 23.

UPD: Another Day in Paradise has also dropped out of the chart, and the script cannot find it in +3 -3 weeks rang from the current date. Solidest (talk) 16:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

It looks good. I recommend not marking the edits as minor, since they do alter the content. Muhandes (talk) 16:32, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Muhandes The new charts also need to have positions centered, as the numbers are misaligned in some places after the changes: In the Dark (Dev song)#Weekly charts. Solidest (talk) 19:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I fixed the alignment issue. Muhandes (talk) 08:35, 13 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I have completed all possible replacements. Among the entries that remain in Category:Single chart usages for Russia: "Another Day in Paradise" + "Safe (Westlife song)" have disappeared from the new site, "Far l'amore" - previously, there was a remix version in the chart, but now it lists the original track from the 70s - A far l'amore comincia tu. All the others are songs that ranked between positions 100 and 500, while the new links only show up to position 100. I have two ideas on how to address this:

1. We could simply convert the links to the standard cite web format and use the Web Archive.
2. Alternatively, we could add an extra link using the songid= parameter — following the same method currently used for CIS. Links like [3] display chart data only as an interactive chart. By selecting "Charts: Russia" above the first graph and hovering over the highest point, a tooltip reveals the chart position. For this track, it’s #195 on October 20, 2005.

Solidest (talk) 01:02, 13 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

If an archive exists, I think it should be used. Otherwise, I think entries which disappeared from the site can be removed. It's most likely they had very few spins anyway. Per WP:OVER200, if the peak is over 200 it shouldn't be listed. Muhandes (talk) 08:41, 13 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I replaced all remaining entries for the "Russia" chart with web archive links where possible, and removed the position in three articles where the archive wasn't available. In cases where the refname parameter was used, I also updated the text where necessary. The old chart can be removed from the code, and a similar update can be added for Ukraine — I'm going to replace it as well. Solidest (talk) 15:57, 13 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest I removed Russia. I added Ukraineradio. Fire away! Muhandes (talk) 10:30, 15 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I've started making the changes.
By the way, we could also add a validation check to ensure that the date format for the Tophit charts is correct. While making replacements, I came across several cases where people had entered an old date in plain text format, and the links hadn’t been working all this time — like in [4]. For example, the following expression:
{{#invoke:String|match|{{{date|}}}|^%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%-%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d$|nomatch={{Single chart/error|Ukraineradio|date}}}} will trigger an error message if the date is not formatted properly. And in {{Single chart/error}}, the following should also be added to the "switch" call:
| Russiaradio | Ukraineradio | Estonia | Kazakhstan | Moldova = {{#if: {{{2|}}} | The date format specified in {{{1|}}} is incorrect. Please enter the date as a range in the format YYYYMMDD-YYYYMMDD. | MISSING PARAMETERS: {{{2}}}. }} Solidest (talk) 14:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest I'm all for it. A similar test should be done for Ireland4, Poland2, Scotland, most of the UK certs etc. Could you please add them directly to the sandbox and add testcases? I'll sync back to the main once it's done. Muhandes (talk) 07:19, 16 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Muhandes, done. I added format checks and also made some adjustments to the error output for the year+week cases (still need to be finished as per the discussion below). Additionally, I fully replaced all uses of Category:Single chart usages for Philippines with Web Archive links and removed it from the template. Plus, some minor cosmetic fixes. Solidest (talk) 19:15, 17 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

By the way, while I was making the edits, I tried to find the correct way to format external links, since currently the code uses them inconsistently. It seems that all three variants are currently in the code:

Variant 1: "[http://site.com Page title]"
Variant 2: "[http://site.com Page title"]
Variant 3: [http://site.com "Page title"]

I tried to find any information in the guidelines about the recommended format, but didn’t find anything specific. I only noticed that Cite Web uses variant 3. Maybe you've come across this question before and found out how it should be? Solidest (talk) 19:21, 17 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest One of the things I dislike most about this template is that it doesn't use {{cite web}}. As a result, it has to handle formatting directly, which leads to this issue. Until that's corrected, variants 1 and 3 are acceptable, while 2 is clearly incorrect. Still, the proper solution would be to use {{cite web}} directly or invoke it via #invoke:cite|web, as done in {{Cite certification}}. That would avoid formatting issues altogether, including the recurring (and valid) requests to italicize the work title. Muhandes (talk) 06:30, 18 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest I applied your sandbox with one change - temporarily both Philippines and Philippines2 point to the newer chart (Philippines2). This was done so I can replace all occurrences of Philippines2 with Philippines and remove Philippines.
ETA: Swap done. We now have only Philippines, which is the new chart. Muhandes (talk) 15:45, 18 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Regarding external links, I think I will go with variant 3 for now, while I continue to standardize the error output. Once everything is in a uniform format, it will be easier to convert to cite web or something else. Solidest (talk) 16:03, 18 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Muhandes Looks like quite a few errors popped up for the UK charts, but I just found out that dates can be entered as either YYYYMMDD or YYYY-MM-DD. The latter just redirects to the former, so all UK charts + Scotland + Ireland4 regexes can be replaced with ^%d%d%d%d%-?%d%d%-?%d%d$ to support both. I've prepared the changes in the sandbox: [5]. Solidest (talk) 16:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Solidest Synced back to main.
ETA: I just noticed the thousands of articles on Category:Single chart used with missing parameters (0) and I can verify this edit fixes some of them and the category is slowly depopulating. Muhandes (talk) 08:55, 19 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Solidest and Muhandes, thank you very much!!! P.S. Please add Belarus too!--Sanslogique (talk) 14:38, 15 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Sanslogique Belarus added. Muhandes (talk) 08:09, 16 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I replaced "Ukraine" with "Ukraineradio" wherever possible. Now only those entries remain that currently rank between 100 and 200, and therefore are not available through the current template links. In the old version of the charts, they were ranked within the top 100, so all of them need to be manually replaced with cite web + Web Archive. Solidest (talk) 19:05, 17 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Canada Rock (Billboard)

Latest comment: 2 months ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Looks like Canada Rock no longer exists at Billboard. For example, this link for Never Never (Korn song) doesn't exist. The latest archived copy I can find is from July 2024. The earliest Canada Mainstream Rock and Canada Modern Rock charts I can find are from January 2025.However, I'm not sure when these new charts actually started and if Canada Rock split into these 2 charts instead. Should Canada Mainstream Rock and Canada Modern Rock be added to the template? MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:03, 13 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

@MrLinkinPark333: I see no reason why they cannot be used. Are you able to add them to the sandbox yourself or do you need help with that? Muhandes (talk) 08:46, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I thought it'd be easy to just add the chart history links. However, Canada Mainstream Rock doesn't appear for Shinedown and Canada Modern Rock doesn't appear for Linkin Park. Perhaps because it's on the Billboard Canada website that it's not on the chart history. Not sure how to incorporate this then. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:14, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@MrLinkinPark333: Do you mean these charts does not appear on the Chart History page at all? If so, we can reference by date, the same way we do for the Philippines Hot 100 chart. Is that what you had in mind? Muhandes (talk) 16:53, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Yes, they don't show up in the artist's chart history. If referencing by date is easier, that could work. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:28, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

@MrLinkinPark333 Have a look at Template:Single chart/testcases#Canadamainstreamrock and Canadamodernrock, see if this is what you need. Muhandes (talk) 13:33, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Looks good! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

  Done Muhandes (talk) 09:15, 13 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Chart-name parameters again

Latest comment: 2 months ago6 comments4 people in discussion

A couple years ago, I started a discussion about adding a chart-name parameter to the template, but it didn't get much feedback. I'm going to try again. If technologically possible, an optional chart-name parameter should be added to pipe links to older chart names, to maintain historical accuracy. Other users believe consistency is more important, but in truth, both are vital practices, and a chart-name parameter could fix that, as it seems rash to maintain consistency based on the automatic output of one single template. To reiterate, the parameter will allow users to pipe links used in the template to other names, like Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs to Hot Black Singles, Pop Airplay to Mainstream Top 40, Recorded Music NZ to RIANZ, and PROMUSICAE to AFYVE. We practice something similar for musical acts that previously went under different names (Kodaline, Fatboy Slim, Jam & Spoon, Dave Lee), so it's only fair to give this a try too. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 12:29, 4 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Such manual entries in articles will only add chaos and errors that are impossible to track. This approach has many issues and questions, such as maintaining chart continuity (some are called continuations of the old chart, some are positioned as new, and some are unclear, like Pop 100). Sources sometimes break historical context (the track was in the old chart name, but the sources such as the Billboard site point to the new one, while other printed sources point to the old one). Billboard itself creates maximum problems with how they choose titles. Some chart titles have literally been juggled between each other for several decades, like the ‘Rock Songs’ chart, which first became ‘Hot Rock Songs,’ then became ‘Hot Rock & Alternative Songs.’ Then ‘Hot Rock Songs’ and ‘Hot Alternative Songs’ appeared as new charts. And now we have two different ‘Hot Rock Songs’ charts. So, how important is it to show the historical name in this context? Or, conversely, is it better to always use the modern/latest chart names? I am definitely in favour of the second option, since I can foresee how many problems the first option would cause. Therefore, I am against the chart-name parameter. If it is truly important to preserve the historical names of the charts (which I doubt), then this should be addressed through the year parameter and the automatic display of historical names based on that. This is not very easy to implement, and it would be necessary to fill in the year parameters in every article, but at least it would allow us to avoid many problems. Solidest (talk) 19:53, 4 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Using modern chart names has similar problems, such as, when a chart or company updates its name, editors have to go through thousands of song articles making changes to non-template instances. Even if it doesn't happen often, that sounds like a pain. I understand that it would be difficult to add a chart-name parameter, but would the first option be any easier? Also, in the case with the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Singles chart, using the template can be misleading for older songs, especially those from before the 1960s, when hip-hop music wasn't really a thing. I have experienced cases where an edit I made was partially reverted for doing this ([6]), as well as a case where I was wholly reverted for "introduc[ing] supposed chart compilers that didn't even exist at the time" ([7]). In other words, they can create valid anachronisms. Using year parameters won't be enough either, as chart names can change any time (Album Rock Tracks changed to Mainstream Rock Tracks in the middle of April '96) Just to simply my idea, the chart-name parameter will be completely optional and will display what is typed in it as a piped link. Even though it sounds easy, I know it won't be, but if consistency truly outrules accuracy, I get it. I appreciate the in-depth review, at any rate. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 20:59, 4 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

A major issue in this regard is that the tables always display the same link to a modern website, which corresponds only to the current chart title. For example, in your first example, the text refers to "Hot Black Singles", but the source only confirms an entry in the "Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs" chart, and the link contains no information about the chart's former names. All contextual information about the renaming remains in the article about the chart itself. I'm not sure how reliable this is in terms of source usage, but it could arguably be considered original research to some extent. Entries in historical charts can only be confirmed through printed sources or web archives, and the template does not automate this. If you have sources for peak positions in an older variants of the chart, you will most likely not use this template and you can specify the needed chart name in plain text. And if you're linking to a modern site, it's probably appropriate to publish that information in the articles as is. It will be accurate relative to the source, as the data holder itself allows such anachronisms. But that's probably debatable. Solidest (talk) 22:04, 4 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I’m with Solidest on this one—seems like too much hassle, and the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. Muhandes (talk) 09:02, 11 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

I came to the talk page looking for a way to use the correct (non-anachronistic) chart names in the template and stumbled on this discussion. I strongly support User:ResolutionsPerMinute's call for at least the option to use the correct chart name with the template. —  AjaxSmack  02:08, 16 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Japan Hot 100 output name

Latest comment: 22 days ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Can the output for the Billboardjapanhot100 entry please be reverted to what it was before April 27? Put more simply, can we remove the "(Billboard)" part of "Japan (Japan Hot 100) (Billboard)"? @Muhandes: MOS:PAREN states we should avoid using consecutive sets of parentheses, e.g. "(...) (...)", and I personally object to using the American Billboard link where Billboard Japan would ideally be used as well. The simple fact is this entire template does not consistently use the publisher in parentheses or follow the "Country (Publisher)" format, so until it does, this awkward-looking "fix" for the Japan Hot 100 entry should revert to what it was. Even then, two consecutive sets of parentheses should not be used. Thanks. Skyversay (talk) 00:42, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

I actually overlooked this when I wanted to remove the repeated "Japan (Japan ...)" and bring it in line with how the other Billboard charts are listed. I think we should just fix the current version instead of reverting to the previous one. That is, make it: Japan [[Billboard Japan Hot 100|Hot 100]] (''[[Billboard Japan|Billboard]]''). Solidest (talk) 00:58, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

I don't agree with piping Billboard Japan to read just Billboard. I remove the pipe wherever I see it as I feel it still (visually) conflates the American Billboard with its Japan-focused offshoot. That being said, I think "Japan Hot 100 (Billboard Japan)" would look awkward too, so that's why I just suggested a revert. Skyversay (talk) 01:06, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Japan [[Billboard Japan Hot 100|Hot 100]] (''[[Billboard Japan]]'') seems like a reasonable compromise, but I don't really care. Reach a consensus and I'll implement it. Muhandes (talk) 09:20, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Although I wanted to avoid repeating "Japan", Muhandes' suggestion seems best, I think. Skyversay (talk) 23:23, 8 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

I've looked at these charts now, and technically, Japanese charts are still published on billboard.com, meaning that the American company is directly involved in this. If it were a Japanese division, the link would be to a different website, as is currently the case with the Philippines Hot 100. (see Template:Single chart/testcases) So I think we should just stay with the same format as we do with Canadian or Luxembourg Billboard charts, i.e. keep the link to Billboard (magazine). Solidest (talk) 12:24, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Luxembourg and other "Hits of the World" charts don't have their own Billboard offshoots where the main chart is originally published like Billboard Japan has at billboard-japan.com, though. The Japan Hot 100 is basically just reuploaded on the US Billboard a day or two later. Whatever the case, two sets of consecutive parentheses needs to be removed. Skyversay (talk) 23:27, 8 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Template-protected edit request on 8 August 2025

Latest comment: 21 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In West Germany, the description says "Specify the year for singles peaking before 1978". This should be changed to "Specify the year for singles peaking before 1977". This is because the first available single chart is from January 1977. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:09, 8 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: If I understand correctly, you are asking to edit the documentation page, which isn't protected so you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Muhandes (talk) 20:42, 9 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Template-protected edit request on 25 August 2025

Latest comment: 2 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

It is requested that an edit be made to the template-protected template at Template:Single chart. (edit · history · last · links · sandbox · edit sandbox · sandbox history · sandbox last edit · sandbox diff · test cases · transclusion count · protection log) This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, so that an editor unfamiliar with the subject matter could complete the requested edit immediately. Edit requests to template-protected pages should only be used for edits that are either uncontroversial or supported by consensus. If the proposed edit might be controversial, discuss it on the protected page's talk page before using this template. Consider making changes first to the template's sandbox and test them thoroughly here before submitting an edit request. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request. When the request has been completed or denied, please add the |answered=yes parameter to deactivate the template.

Please add the following chart.

| Billboardrandbsongs = {{!}} US [[Hot R&B Songs]] (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]''){{#tag:ref|{{#if:{{{artist|}}}||{{Single chart/error|{{{1}}}|artist}}}}[https://www.billboard.com/artist/{{#invoke:WLink|ansiPercent|{{#invoke:String|replace|{{{artist}}}|&|%26}}|space=-}}/chart-history/BST "{{{artist}}} Chart History (Hot R&B Songs)"]. [[Billboard (magazine)|''Billboard'']]. {{#if:{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate|}}}}}}|{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate}}}}}}. }} {{#if:{{{access-date|{{{accessdate|}}}}}}| Retrieved {{{access-date|{{{accessdate}}}}}}. }}|name={{#if:{{{refname|}}}|{{{refname}}}|"sc_{{trim|{{{1|}}}}}_{{{artist|}}}"}}|group={{#if:{{{refgroup|}}}| "{{{refgroup}}}"}}}} {{Single chart/chartnote|{{{note|}}}}} UnregisteredBiohazard! 19:49, 25 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:05, 26 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Jonesey95: Tested it on the template's testcases page (see Template:Single chart/testcases#Testing Billboardrandbsongs) and it seems to work fine. It just needs an additional line below:

{{!}}style="text-align:center;"{{!}}{{{2}}} UnregisteredBiohazard! 00:44, 29 August 2025 (UTC)Reply