Talk:Bryn Jones discography

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Discographies

This article is within the scope of the Discographies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's collection of discography articles and lists. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. Any questions pertaining to discography-related articles should be directed to the project's talk page.DiscographiesWikipedia:WikiProject DiscographiesTemplate:WikiProject DiscographiesDiscography articles

Format

I think Bryn's solo releases as E.g Oblique Graph, his solo releases as Muslimgauze, and his releases in collaboration with other artists should be in separate sections of this discography page. I'm going to continue making updates in that way, but let's discuss if anyone has a different opinion. dil 20:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We should create as many sections as is reasonable. --Mperry 00:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a few of the blue links to albums just take you back to the top of the page. Might it be worth doing a bit of pruning to remove some of the links? I'll have a go at a few. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.202.53 (talk) 14:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Internal links

Another note - years should not be linked, per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Partial dates, and only the first instance of things like record-labels should be linked, per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Overlinking and underlinking: what's the best ratio?. Thanks :) --Quiddity 21:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll fix that up later today. Also, I can probably write a small shell script to convert the rest of the list to the table format. I will do that today or tomorrow as well. --Mperry 21:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Convert list to table

I converted the list to a table. The table is pretty long now but dividing things into sections should help. If you want to change the format you can go into the history to get the list and then use this perl script:

 #!/usr/bin/perl
 s/^# //;
 s/(.*)\ \(([0-9]{4})\)\ (.*)\ \((.*)\)\ (.*)/
 |-
 |align="left"|
 |align="left"|'''\1'''
 * Released: \2
 * Format: \5
 * Label: \3
 * Catalogue Number: \4/x;

--Mperry 00:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

repressings

repressings should not be listed on this page, they should be noted in the individual articles for each album. --AlexOv Shaolin 05:36, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think the only exception should be for releases like Uzi (The Rape of Palestine) or Coup D'Etat/Abu Nidal. dil 12:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes, they are completely different releases, i agree. --AlexOv Shaolin 20:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taqwacore

I removed this as a category for two reasons. First, Muslimgauze wasn't a punk project and Taqwacore seems to espouse some kind of melange of hardcore punk and Islamic culture; slapping a genre label on Muslimgauze that postdates Bryn's death by four years doesn't really seem appropriate. Second, I'm having trouble buying into a genre that is named after a book detailing a (then) fictional genre of music and that, according to Wikipedia, has precisely one band attributed to it. dil 21:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Track Times

Not a question about this page specifically, but rather the individual release pages: is there a standard way we should list the track times? I'm seeing a few different formats over the course of the pages. Everything from xx.xx to xx:xx to having the time stand alone to having in brackets or parentheses. dil 12:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this is pretty much the standard way:

"Song Name" - 1:02
"Song Name2" - 0:04
"Song Name3" - 12:02

Hope that answers the question, any songs not listed in this format should be changed to this format. --AlexOv Shaolin 02:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images

The use of images in this way is not in accordance with Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria policy (likely in that the use is not minimal (3.a.) and it is in a list or a gallery (8.)) or our Wikipedia:Non-free content guideline which states that album covers are to only be used with critical commentary and not just identification. Kotepho 08:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol, fascism. wikipedia just jumped the shark. --AlexOvShaolin 14:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you have any substantive remarks to make? Our policies don't allow us to use other people's images in this way. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

new setup

i changed the E.g Oblique section & collaborative/split release sections to make them more compact. any thoughts on redoing the page like this? --AlexOv Shaolin 21:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it looks great. It's definitely a better use of the horizontal space. --Mperry 22:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Tabular is best for tabular data, it can then also be made sortable (eg by year or title): Help:Sorting. --Quiddity 01:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I vote a big fat yes on that one. I'm kicking myself for not thinking of it, as I use a similarly laid-out spreadsheet for keeping track of my record collection. And glad to see you back on board this one, AOS! dil 13:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanx for handling the rest dil, looks a lot better now. --AlexOv Shaolin 19:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. The Find-Replace command worked beautifully for removing the old tags. I'll try to get some of the albums that are missing individual pages takes care of over the weekend. On a somewhat related topic, I think I have a way we can reintroduce album art to the album pages without risking the wrath of the fair-use cops. I'm going to try it on one of them over the weekend and see if I can get it to stick. dil 20:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I came across some copypasta of a fair use rationale for album covers. check out my user page, i posted it there. --AlexOv Shaolin 23:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

move to 'Bryn Jones discography'

i think this is a more accurate and discriptive title, a la Aphex Twin is the main page for Richard D. James, but the discography is still listed as Richard D. James discography due to releases under multiple aliases. thoughts? --AlexOv Shaolin 00:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense to me. I say do it. --Mperry 04:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Major facelift

Simplified tables by removing format, Cat#, notes, etc from tables; they can be listed on album pages.

Added infobox, removed TOC which is redundant with infobox.
Mixed collaborations in with albums and EPs.
Moved expanded reissues to separate heading.
Moved compilation albums to separate heading.
Separated remixes from compilation tracks, added missing.
Removed compilation tracks known to be the same as album versions (or edits of them).
Delinked compilation albums, most aren't notable enough to ever have articles.
Removed references since they're just the official Muslimgauze page & Discogs.com.

Both the split with F:A.R. and Les Joyaux have album tracks, but I left them because they are unique releases with Muslimgauze on the cover.96.18.192.156 (talk) 17:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: diff prior to changes.

The introduction and references should be replaced, as articles should be able to stand on their own, and could be arrived at from anywhere so need context.

I'm not sure about the other changes. I'll try to get back to this, to have a closer look, later. -- Quiddity (talk) 02:42, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]