Talk:List of blues standards

List of blues standards is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 17, 2021	Peer review	Reviewed
November 21, 2021	Featured list candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured list

Lists

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Songs

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

Archives

1

2023 update

Following the addition of new sources, it may be helpful to acknowledge entries that have a much larger number of mentions than those with fewer. This could be done by splitting the table into two, with one for "10 or more sources" (about 2/3 of the songs) and another for "5–9 sources" (1/3). Another option may be to add a sort function to the "refs" column so it sorts on the number of sources. The idea is to make it more user friendly. Any other ideas or comments? —Ojorojo (talk) 16:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mudwater: Any thoughts? I'm leaning towards splitting the table as in this draft.[1] It will make more sense when adding new songs (I found some more).—Ojorojo (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ojorojo: My initial thought is that I don't see how this makes the table more user friendly. I guess it would show that some blues standards are more standard than others, so to speak, at least based on the number of references, but I don't think it's necessary to do that. In fact having a single table might be more user friendly as it makes it easier to find a song in the list. — Mudwater^(Talk) 22:13, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mudwater: My concern was that some readers may question why lesser known songs, such as "Don't You Lie to Me" or "Blues with a Feeling", are presented/treated the same as famous ones ("Stormy Monday", "Sweet Home Chicago", etc.). However, I also have concerns about overcomplicating the article for those looking for a simple list. At this point, it's probably fine as is and can be revisited if the need should arise. Thanks for your input. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ojorojo: Sure. Thanks for raising this question. — Mudwater^(Talk) 15:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This list is incomplete

We should work on adding some more blues standards here. For instance Voodoo Chile (Slight Return) is debatably a blues standard. But I was thinking Come On by Earl King is definitely missing here. 208.87.236.180 (talk) 14:49, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The list selection criteria is five or more reliable sources that identify a song specifically as a "blues standard". Searches do not show that the songs you mention have been identified as such. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]