Talk:The Nothing (Korn album)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• KORN-The-Nothing-Cover.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:36, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Notability template

I decided to move the discussion here in order to avoid an edit war, but let me provide examples of the countless (yes, countless) notable, reliable sources covering this very album:

1. NME https://www.nme.com/reviews/album/korn-the-nothing-review
2. Rolling Stone https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/korn-the-nothing-youll-never-find-me-852515/
3. Kerrang! https://www.kerrang.com/the-news/jonathan-davis-explains-the-title-of-korns-new-album-the-nothing/
4. Loudwire https://loudwire.com/korn-the-nothing-album-youll-never-find-me-song/
5. Louder https://www.loudersound.com/news/korn-launch-new-single-can-you-hear-me-and-announce-the-nothing-podcast-series

How many sources do we need to prove that this album is notable? If the lack of references in the article itself is an issue, you're using the wrong template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnalogIgor (talk • contribs) 15:58, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

We need significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Most of these are WP:ROUTINE coverage before the album was released. Agreed that if it was lack of references in the article we'd want to apply {{More citations needed}}. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:09, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

And not countless: You counted five. Less hyperbole and more WP:V please. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:10, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

For the record, the notability of an album could come in two ways: it meets WP:NALBUM (with all of the references to support the claim) or WP:GNG (which applies to all articles). I don't see that here yet, but likely to come soon. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Let me quote from the guideline: "Has been the subject of multiple (five publications is "multiple", but I could find many more if I wanted to, I feel I just have already wasted way too much time on this), non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it(all five sources meet all of those criteria)". Please answer my question: how many sources do you need before an album becomes "notable"? 10? 15? 100? "Routine" guideline would apply if I were trying to create a separate album about the album premiere, which I am not (please provide a source about an album which is not "routine" in your opinion so that I have a reference) . Here, Vice just dropped an article about the album (https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/j5y53k/korn-new-album-the-nothing-are-still-in-this-for-life), Los Angeles Times (https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/music/story/2019-09-10/korn-nu-metal-the-nothing), The Verge (https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/6/20852574/korn-podcast-the-nothing-release-date-album-song-journalist-darkness), this one is probably "not reliable", but whatever (https://www.blabbermouth.net/cdreviews/the-nothing/)... how many? 20? 2000?AnalogIgor (talk) 15:14, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

So what we have in the article is coverage of songs on the album, not the album. We need significant coverage of the album. If you think you have that, add them to the article, but stop wasting your effort on convincing me. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Album genre

I can see that there is a lot of edits and revisions over this one, so I suggest that we prioritize finding a decent source. The only one I have been able to find so far is the allmusic review, which lists 'Alternative Metal', 'Heavy Metal' and 'Pop/Rock' - so there is a potential citation for at least the Alternative Metal claim. Almost every source that the article cites uses 'nu-metal' to refer to the band, but none of them exclusively refer to the ALBUM as nu-metal per se. However, isn't it fair to assume that since the articles specifically dedicated to the album call the band nu-metal and mention how the album is in the band's usual style (e.g. "we have another record that captures the pitch-black, often harrowing honesty of Korn’s early material" from Louder's review,"Proving that it is possible to stick to your original musical blueprint and indulge in endless experimentation, KORN have endured for all the right reasons." from blabbermouth's review, I could cite more), would it really be OR or SYNTH to conclude that the sources are saying that the album is nu-metal? To state my argument more briefly: 1) The sources call the band nu-metal 2) The sources say that the album is in the same genre as past albums 3) Therefore, the sources state implicitly that the album is nu-metal

Do we REALLY need a source that explicitly state 'Korn released a nu-metal album' and can't just accept 'Korn, a nu-metal band, have released an album that sounds like their previous albums [therefore they released a nu-metal album]' ? After all, this applies and, for example, most articles about Motorhead albums don't have sources that explicitly states that 'this is a hard rock album', and yet the articles do list the genre in the article, based on the sources that state 'yup, Motorhead just released another album that sounds like them' - and I would argue that they are better for it, not worse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnalogIgor (talk • contribs) 16:50, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I have checked a few reviews, and none discuss the genre of the work.

1. Add a style section
2. Add references where the album's style is discussed (see WP:GWAR
3. Add those to the infobox.

It's not complicated. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)