Talk:LyricWiki

message: I'm surprised that no one else had put this article up yet!!!! Sr13 02:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It had, it just got deleted. User_talk:SColombo#Lyric_Wiki_Article. 137.229.57.162 12:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ^ that was me. DevastatorIIC 12:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Surprise!

message: Is Lyricwiki a for-profit or a nonprofit outfit?  Thanks, Maikel (talk) 19:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And do they plaster their pages with adverts and ring tones and other sorts of crap that slow it down for those with low bandwidth connections and/or slow computers? Or is it clean, and hence the go-to source? 78.147.62.12 (talk) 13:36, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Whaddaya do for money, honey?

message: In above mentioned deletion review concerns were raised about the link to the Lyricwiki site violating either the letter or the spirit of Wikipedia:Copyrights#Linking_to_copyrighted_works with the suggestion to at the least enclose it in "nowiki" tags. While the idea garnered some support, it isn't really the realm of DRV so it should be settled here--Tikiwont (talk) 19:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to split hairs, but the policy advises "do not link to that copy of the work". The spirit of this, for example, is not editing the Indiana Jones article to add a link to an illegal download of the movie on BitTorrent. It is not a blanket ban on links to sites that somewhere on the site contain copyrighted work, perhaps against the yet-unstated wishes of the copyright holder, otherwise we couldn't link to YouTube or even Google. So in other words, I think we're fine leaving the link up. --Rividian (talk) 00:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to site 

message: Would it considered appropriate to put in the article that LyricWiki is in the InterWiki Map?  It seems relevant to wiki'ers but not to encyclopedic browsers in general. -SColombo (talk) 00:20, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that all interwiki links are reverted as links to a copyright violation, I don't think so. I'm surprised that the interwiki function hasn't been disabled yet.—Kww(talk) 00:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not all of them would be copyright violations. For example, public domain lyrics. --Explodicle (T/C) 14:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's true that there is a vanishingly small percentage of non-infringing materials. Pirates occasionally steal things that were free anyway.—Kww(talk) 14:38, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki 

message: People have mentioned that the article could use more history or information about how it is run (possibly the server architecture, etc?), but how can that be sourced?  Does a site just need to make a post on their blog about their history or architecture or would that be considered a bad source since it's primary.  The confusing part is that the only way this information would ever be able to come out is somehow through the source itself.  For instance, if someone interviewed people in charge of running a given site. -SColombo (talk) 00:20, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Blogs and other self-published sources are generally considered unacceptable unless your work related to LyricWiki has already been published by a reliable third party publication, and even then it has to be used carefully. If you got interviewed by a reliable third party source reputed for fact-checking and accuracy, then we could source that with no problems. --Explodicle (T/C) 14:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History, Operations, etc. 

message: Got the following message, when trying to download lyrics with Quod Libet:
Unfortunately, due to licensing restrictions from some of the major music publishers we can no longer return lyrics through the LyricWiki API (where this application gets some or all of its lyrics).
The lyrics for this song can be found at the following URL:
http://lyricwiki.org/Razorlight:Wire_To_Wire
(Please note: this is not the fault of the developer who created this application, but is a restriction imposed by the music publishers themselves.)
--80.130.215.178 (talk) 04:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Full story. --WillMak050389 05:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, would it be possible, that LyricWiki forced this? So that their ads get displayed? --80.130.186.226 (talk) 20:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No API anymore? 

message: Please update article with this info. --201.223.71.86 (talk) 16:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  LyricWiki migrated to Wikia 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://lyricwiki.org/index.php?title=LyricWiki:Copyrights&oldid=1870076
*:Triggered by \blyricwiki\.org\b on the global blacklist
*http://lyricwiki.org/index.php?title=LyricWiki:Plugins&oldid=4188961
*:Triggered by \blyricwiki\.org\b on the global blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 18:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on LyricWiki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061231020800/http://www.webuser.co.uk:80/sites/site_review.php?rev_id=3139 to http://www.webuser.co.uk/sites/site_review.php?rev_id=3139
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:45, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Lyrically. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160117224510/http://api.wikia.com/wiki/LyricWiki_API to http://api.wikia.com/wiki/LyricWiki_API
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160117224510/http://api.wikia.com/wiki/LyricWiki_API to http://api.wikia.com/wiki/LyricWiki_API
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm seeing that the wiki is not closed. Can somebody edit this?
Baris6161TURK (talk) 19:43, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lyric Wiki is not closed 

message: So I went on the LyricWiki recently, and I just found out that it will be closed by Fandom on September 21. I've checked that wiki a lot during my childhood. Now it's going to be gone forever.--2601:194:480:C790:54D7:A062:9DE6:27CB (talk) 20:35, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, the admins there really ran the site into the ground, deliberately breaking the terms of service repeatedly. They made it so that many persons contributions are totally wasted. A sad situation all around but it's totally avoidable. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sad News... 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:09, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion