Talk:Moon (Gackt album)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gacktmoon.jpg

Image:Gacktmoon.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gackt Moon album - need a proffesional review rating?

Web Music Proffesional Judger? Everyone knows, tastes are tastes and everyone have his 'favourite', even to say, there are people ( no one can't and musn't be ) who can't be real person to judge and rate albums, singles, or something to do about music. Gackt in Japan is highly respected as music artists and pianist, some to say one of better pianist ever. After all, Gackt is a artist who at first 'saw' person will love, but at any rate need more listening. After all, Person who typed this, was a music judge and review isn't neither 70% true. Question:

Does is need ( Gackt Moon album ) to have a 'allmusic' proffesional review?--GreyWolfy (talk) 12:54, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there's a requirement so to say, but the general consensus on all album articles has been that reviews from professional sources should always be included. I don't see why an Allmusic review should not be included, if it's still included just about everywhere else. Eugeniu B msg 22:21, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding--GreyWolfy (talk) 12:54, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gackt MOON album - about proffesional review

There was closed-section about "proffesional review rating, and opened new ones.

To talk about proffesional reviews, and not just only for this article. From the point I was a music-reviewer, I am strong against "proffesional" reviews on the Internet, there are multiple elements way. For example "Allmusic":

The AMG editorial staff, along with Hundreds of expert contributors (all music Fanatics in their own right), has made allmusic the most comprehensive music reference source on the planet. We are all dedicated to creating and Maintaining the knowledgeable, Spirited content that music lovers and industry professionals have come to expect from AMG.

All genres and styles of music are covered here, ranging from the most commercially popular to the most obscura. We critique albums and artists within the context of their own genres - from opera to garage rock to traditional country. This ensures that fans of any style of music can depend on us to keep them up-to-date with their favorite artists as well as introduce them to new sounds.Etc.

Their Web Site doesn't clearly explain about every musical genre and style, to not entering in details, especially about the content of Japanese Rock / Visual Kei / etc. For example, "Gackt's" profile is far from the base text with information about musician, while influenced by David Bowie, hide, X Japan "is not logical and not rational."

-- Here is the review about "Moon album":

Click here to read the Allmusic review of Gackt's album Moon.

I agree with many of the said terms, except that the album has nothing to do with some plagiarism. The concept of the album and the story is not written. Album is not intended for any other reviewers with the U.S. and other music scenes, but the third one who should recognize and know to go beyond borders. "Gackt" has respect in Japan, his songs are simple at first glance, but after the second listening (the sound quality has dropped today, so it is better to listen on a Walkman than a Music Player) to hear a completely new components, concepts and words. Heavy album searching a long time,even a year, season, everything is possible in some to recognize how truly is worth. Rating "3.5" describes this album, this receive only the heaviest albums.

But reviews like this, who are not telling the truth but toughts from one person (there is plenty different out there) is better not to add in the articles.--GreyWolfy (talk) 23:00, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I only found out about this today, but as of December 2 (or sometime around then), reviews should not be included in the infobox at all, but instead written about in paragraphs in a "Reception" section, like I've just done to this article. I still think that the Allmusic review should be included (in that section I mean), but if you find any more information about the reception of the album, like other reviews, you should include it in the Reception section. Eugeniu B +1 02:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]