Jana Liedtexte
https://www.instagram.com/janavip2011/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_(singer)
76 Lieder 114 Mal übersetzt in 13 Sprachen
✕
TOP 5
Anzeigen
Beliebte Lieder
Übersetzungen
Rame uz rame
Jana
Jana 5
Žena zmaj
Kommentare 13
Moved into proper artist entry.
This artist entry exists: https://lyricstranslate.com/en/jana-lyrics.html
Merged.
Thanks. I saw my song entry was unpublished, but the translation is still up. Should I delete it?
I copied it and added it to the published entry. So now there seem to be two.
Yes, please delete the translation linked to your unpublished song page. Additionally, I've noticed that you added some tags to the source lyrics that are not permitted by the Lyrics Formatting Guidelines. Kindly avoid doing so in the future. Thank you.
I'm not sure what you're referring to.
https://lyricstranslate.com/en/formatting-rules
7. Tags such as "[Chorus]" or "[Intro: Otto & Joost]" are permitted under the following conditions: each tag must be on a separate line, and within square brackets.
https://lyricstranslate.com/en/jana-ljubomorna-sam-lyrics
Exactly. These are the only types of tags that are permitted. Tags such as "[Strofa 1, 2, etc.]", "[Pred-Refren]", and "[Instrumentalna pauza]", present in your entry, are not.
In other words, the examples given in the guidelines are exhaustive? You are only permitted to tag the chorus and the intro? Don't make me laugh...
You know good and well that's not what that rule is stating. What do you think "such as" means? Quickly.
Do I seem like I’m in the mood to entertain you, blazestarr? It’s not difficult to understand that the only tags allowed are for "Chorus" and those specifying who is performing what in the case of multiple artists performing a song. I’m sure you’re smart enough to grasp this simple rule. Kindly adhere to it moving forward.
Nowhere do the guidelines state that. The verbiage "such as" suggests that the examples given are only two possibilities out of many. In what way does that rule, as written, clarify that those are the only two permitted tags? Why would you only tag the chorus and/or the sections with multiple performers and leave the rest without a heading? It's nonsensical.
No Moderator has ever made a comment about this to me and there are countless entries following this format.
Also unsure why you attempted to make a dig about intelligence (lol), but I've grown to not expect tact from any interactions here.
I’m sorry if you feel uncertain about several aspects here, but I would like to focus on the main issue. The restrictions on tags were implemented due to their prior misuse. While I don’t know why no one has previously guided you regarding the entries you mentioned, this doesn’t mean they comply with the formatting rules. Staff members have the right to remove unnecessary tags when necessary, and as you can see, there’s always a first time for everything.
If you believe the wording of this specific rule is unclear or doesn’t make sense, I encourage you to communicate this to the Administrators so that potential improvements can be considered. Perhaps other users share your concerns as well. However, it might also be helpful to reflect on why it’s necessary, in your view, to explicitly include obvious elements in source lyrics—such as numbering verses or marking instrumental sections.
So tagging the chorus alone (an "obvious element" in your words) is completely logical, but tagging the verses and instrumental breaks is ridiculous?
I'm sure you're familiar with Genius.com, a site which follows the practice of tagging each song section because of its utility for musicians and clarity for readers. Oftentimes the writers/artists/producers themselves collaborate with the site to produce the published lyrics.
You're trying to be condescending and haughty but it just isn't working. Sorry.
First and foremost, I choose to set aside any characterizations, as my sole aim from the beginning has been to reach a mutual understanding. As you will see below, I have no intention of creating conflict with you, despite any assumptions to the contrary. On the contrary, by taking your concerns seriously, I decided to revisit all discussions held since the implementation of Formatting Guideline #7 (the subject of our conversation), rather than relying solely on what I already knew. I believe this simple action demonstrates my intention to be fair rather than to simply prove myself right.
The issue of tags is not new on this site; there have been numerous debates about it. When I was a new user, I also followed the Genius format until it became clear that it created unnecessary visual clutter and extra work for translators without serving a practical purpose.
To the point: Initially the wording of the guideline in question was somehow contradictory, as you can see here: https://lyricstranslate.com/en/comment/1118203#comment-1118203.
However, the Admin's purpose to discourage users from adding tags to lyrics was obvious.
Later, there was a discussion about keeping old entries as they were while 'forbidding' tags in new ones. Eventually, it was decided by the Admins to lift the tag-related restriction, as there were already many lyrics and translations containing such tags. Thus, the guideline was revised to make tag usage optional, provided they are enclosed in brackets (for technical reasons).
Even so, it had been already agreed, before guideline #7 was implemented, to avoid using tags or to include only the necessary ones, which remains the practice today. You can see another Moderator referring to that here: https://lyricstranslate.com/en/comment/1087561#comment-1087561
The aim is to maintain a cleaner layout, prevent alignment issues between original lyrics and translations (since some translators do not add tags to their translations) and other problems I mentioned above.
For this reason, staff members may sometimes remove excessive tags from certain entries, but it is very rare for us to add missing tags. However, regardless of common practice, it was a mistake on my part to state that adding tags is 'not allowed' when I should have clarified that it is 'not recommended.' I sincerely apologize for this misunderstanding and for any inconvenience it may have caused.