Talk:The Pale Emperor

The Pale Emperor is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 15, 2017.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 27, 2016	Good article nominee	Listed
September 5, 2016	Peer review	Reviewed
November 30, 2016	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured article

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Alternative music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rock music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Metal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal 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.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal articles

Quality

Overall, this article looks pretty good. At this point, it's time to get this through the peer review process to refine it and get it into good article standing. -Red marquis (talk) 12:57, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

The Esquire source was already on the article, and I've used the Vice one as a second source to confirm the duration of production/recording. There's nothing else on either source that hasn't already been included here and backed up with other sources. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Who's Afraid of Marilyn Manson?Wayback

Blues-rock

Unless the source explicitly states the genre talking about the album as a whole. Do not add it to the infobox with several sources behind it. Let's see what your sources says, The first states "The Pale Emperor introduces a new influence: the blues. In an interview with The Fader, Manson stated: “What I hadn’t ever found, till now, is the blues. The blues changed the way that I sang. And the music has a melody and a language in and of itself.”

Now, this doesn’t mean this is an album full of blues clichés and songs about being left by his woman. Rather, Manson weaves a bluesy style into his music in a much more subtle way. Many of the tracks here have the familiar cadence and overall feel of a blues / rock song, but are still unmistakably Marilyn Manson. The song “Birds Of Hell Awaiting” has that classic 6/8 blues shuffle that brings to mind George Thorogood’s “I Drink Alone.” The two songs even begin in the same key.". At the best, it suggests an influence of blues.

The second source which is quoting another source for the record as this is a source about K-Pop music, states "In a report by Faster Louder, a slight difference in the music of Marilyn Manson can be heard on the new album "The Pale Emperor." A heavier "dirty bluesy hard rock" was said to be the new sound.", again, it only states an influence. Not that the album belongs to the genre.

The NME source states the album has "more common is a bleak, bluesy rock that splits the difference between Bauhaus, The Bad Seeds and True Detective.".

So per WP:STICKTOSOURCE and WP:SYN, you can not just get that it's a blues-rock album because none of the sources explicitly state that. If anything, they all simply suggest it as an influence. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is where interpretation of sources comes in to play. You seem to be interpreting the Zumic source as merely suggesting an influence, but I see that source as confirming that blues rock runs throughout the entirety of the album. It states "Many of the tracks here have the familiar cadence and overall feel of a blues / rock song", and goes on to discuss things as fundamental as song time signatures, as well as his vocal style (which, of course, can be found throughout "the album as a whole"). The NME review references a "bleak, bluesy rock that splits the difference between Bauhaus, The Bad Seeds and True Detective" (the latter being a TV series - with a blues rock soundtrack). The addition of a "y" does not negate the reference to "blues rock". The KPOP reference states a "Heavy Blues Rock Shift" in its title. A combination of sources does not immediately fall under WP:SYNTH - it merely suggests that it's a problematic statement (which this thread indicates it is). I suggest we wait for more input before editing any further. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So it doesn't look like we're getting "more input" on this anytime soon. I found a couple more sources for 'blues/blues rock', and some of them seem [to me, at least] to satisfy the "the source [should] explicitly state the genre when talking about the album as a whole" criteria:

"For lifelong fans of the band, it may come as a discouraging surprise to hear the controversial, gothic group [...] create a blues record that almost completely abandons the band's previous sound. The fact of the matter is that The Pale Emperor is able to retain the darkness and edginess that the band so eloquently crafted throughout their career while still being a mildly easy-to-digest blues rock album." The Crate Writers.
"Co-written with producer and composer Tyler Bates [...] the album changes tack by focusing on the blues as the roots of rock and roll. This also invokes the appropriately Faustian element of old blues men selling their souls to the archfiend. The result is an older and wiser album that’s swapped out metal riffs and industrial motifs for blues." Hop Scotch Friday
"On The Pale Emperor, that fire is not only back, but firmly under Manson’s control. There are plenty of dynamic peaks and troughs scattered throughout The Pale Emperor‘s blighted depths, and the whole thing breathes like an old blues record. Where Manson’s last few albums felt watered down, The Pale Emperor feels restrained – and all the more vital and thrilling for it." Musical Melting Pot.

Are any of these satisfactory? Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:52, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blues maybe for the first one, but expect edit war history. None of these says blues-rock, so they aren't acceptable for blues-rock. I'll try to call some other genre projects here to bring more to the discussion. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:28, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea about calling in some other people, but I don't understand how the first source isn't acceptable to you. I've bolded the relevant parts. They explicitly and directly call it a "blues rock album". What else does one need? Homeostasis07 (talk) 18:29, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This might work:

"With film composer Tyler Bates writing the music, the songs have a sombre, muscular take on belting blues rock with an industrial/electronic sheen." The Sydney Morning Herald Myxomatosis57 (talk) 15:15, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So @Andrzejbanas:, it's been over 3 weeks since you last replied to this topic. Can you confirm that you agree to the inclusion of the blues rock genre, per the first source I posted, and the source @Myxomatosis57: posted? Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:52, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That last source might be alright, but it all still seems so minor and without a greater explanation in the prose, it may give listeners the wrong idea of the genre of the album. I apologize for slow replies as I've been busy with other tasks, but I'd suggest either more input from others, or remove genres from the infobox for this article and just have it suggest the users to read the prose to get a much better understanding of the music than any bullet-pointed list could suggest. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:20, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Pale Emperor/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Retrohead (talk · contribs) 17:05, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this as part of the GA cup. Since the article is quite lengthy, I'll post comments as I read the prose.

~~By "newcomer Tyler Bates", you mean it was Bates' debut as a producer?~~
Can't we lose the references in the genre section and discuss it in the prose? If IPs keep changing it, add a hidden note not to do that.
There are several links that change path and need to be updated. See the box on the right.
Media seems to be ok, but do we have alternatives to the Twitter and Instagram references?
Ref 105 is not properly formatted. Also, Loudwire and The Quietus should be italicized, both in the prose/table and references.

Sorry I didn't see this sooner, @Retrohead:. This page, and the section on the article's talk page, never showed up on my watchlist, for some reason. But I've made all the changes you've pointed out above, all bar one. I can't get ref 54 (Amazon.com: Third Day of a Seven Day Binge - Marilyn Manson) to stop changing path. I don't know what the problem is. That's the bare minimum URL there, and it's exactly what shows up on my address bar. Could you take a couple of seconds to look at it? Thanks. Homeostasis07 (talk) 19:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay Homeostasis07, I was participating in street protests here in Macedonia, but here's the rest of the review:

Can you reduce the sample quality to about 60 kbps as the sample guidance suggest? 80 is not a big deviation, and if you can't, it won't be a big problem. The images are fine.

Done. Homeostasis07 (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the commercial performance, do we have worldwide sales, or total sales in the US perhaps? I mist admit, the new Billboard sales counter seems confusing a bit, but I think you've handled well overall sales vs pure album sales.

I can't find a source for worldwide sales; and the last reported US sales figure is the 136,000+ figure from MetalInsider, which only post the "pure" album sales, for some reason. I think it only did an extra 1k in the US with streaming/track downloads on its first week. I doubt the total SPS figure is much higher than that, to be honest. Homeostasis07 (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the critical reception at most album articles is that it reads like WP:QUOTEFARM. Writers simply ramdomly stack a bunch of quotations from magazines that don't read cohesive. Try paraphrasing some of these, maybe group the positive and the negative reviews in different paragraphs.

I've changed the critical reception section up here. I removed either 7 or 8 individual quotes there, and then started to struggle with reducing it down any further. Let me know if that's not enough, and I'll give it another try. Homeostasis07 (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Release and artwork' section is closely related to the commercial performance, but if you think these topics should be separated, no problem.

I think there's enough there to warrant separate sections. There's stuff in Release and artwork that would need to be removed altogether for it to work in Commercial performance. Homeostasis07 (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm putting this on hold. If you're done with a point I raised, please respond below it for better navigation. Thanks for all your effort and patience so far.

Thanks @Retrohead:. I'll make the changes you've described above within 24 hours. I've just come off an - unexpected - double shift tonight, and I'm not in a very good state of mind to be editing Wikipedia right now. I'll make your suggested changes when I get some sleep. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again @Retrohead: I think I've done everything. If there's anything else, let me know. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That would be all. If can you remove the Quietus review from the box and add another one with an actual score (positive and negative is someone's perception, not a score). Also, can you reduce the "definitive box set" from the lead to just "box set" (also losing the quotes). Appreciate your work so far.--Retrohead (talk) 18:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both done. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Pale Emperor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:58, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on The Pale Emperor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:11, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on The Pale Emperor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:45, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]