Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Metal/Archive 13
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Genre warrior
I have encountered a particular genre warrior that has been doing this for a lengthy amount of time. Before I give any more information about this person, I'm wondering if this is the right place to discuss the genre warrior and his/her modus operandi (by the way, some of you reading this my have encountered the person's edits before). If this is not the most opportune place to discuss this, then where would be a better place to submit my concern? Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 07:08, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- I see no problem with it being discussed here.Inhumer (talk) 00:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, cool. The particular person on my mind is someone who has been at the business since at least January 17, 2009. This edit on the My Dying Bride page is the earliest I have found of this person's so far. This edit on the System of a Down page, performed on August 2, 2010, is the most recent I have found performed by this person. So, as for the characteristics of this person, one thing done by this person is mess with the infobox genre formatting and potentially adding or deleting genres from the respective area, without consensus reached. This person almost never discusses the changes; the only time that I know of which has come close to discussing the changes was when this person changed the nearby invisible text to fit their own needs. By utilizing the invisible text, for instance, the person made a scene on the Paradise Lost and Faith Divides Us - Death Unites Us pages. One other thing this person may do is, in the introductory passage, when the sentence is "x band is a y genre band from z location", the genre will be made unnecessarily specific (example: "Paradise Lost is a heavy metal band" → "Paradise Lost is a Gothic Metal band") Here is an example of such an edit. Also, notice how the term "gothic metal" is capitalized, since capitalizing genres in such a manner is discouraged by wikipedia. The person has gone outside these areas, and has even performed valid edits, but such instances don't occur very often. This person usually revolves around articles that display info of bands or respective albums that are or were of the death/doom or gothic genres (ex. Paradise Lost, Anathema, Funeral, Tiamat, Cemetary, My Dying Bride), nu metal (ex. Soulfly, Korn, Marilyn Manson), thrash metal (ex. Metallica, Annihilator, Flotsam & Jetsam), and grunge, post-grunge or alternative genres (ex. Silverchair, Mudvayne, Nickelback, Staind). This person has operated through more than 35 IPs, all or most of which fit the name of 90.2xx.xxx.xxx; the first x digit can be, and usually is, a 1 or a 2; the two groups of three x's don't have to be three numbers exactly, but can be. I'm just stating that people should watch out for IPs that fit the above description, and if something can be done about this, then that would be cool. Also, sorry for the long post; I should probably specify that I'm not angry as I post this message, even though this is a problem, as stated earlier, which has been manifested for over a year. Thanks for reading. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 05:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry if that long post of mine is a little bit off, for a lack of better terminology. However, if anybody is interested, I have a sockpuppet case against the IP range now. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 22:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, cool. The particular person on my mind is someone who has been at the business since at least January 17, 2009. This edit on the My Dying Bride page is the earliest I have found of this person's so far. This edit on the System of a Down page, performed on August 2, 2010, is the most recent I have found performed by this person. So, as for the characteristics of this person, one thing done by this person is mess with the infobox genre formatting and potentially adding or deleting genres from the respective area, without consensus reached. This person almost never discusses the changes; the only time that I know of which has come close to discussing the changes was when this person changed the nearby invisible text to fit their own needs. By utilizing the invisible text, for instance, the person made a scene on the Paradise Lost and Faith Divides Us - Death Unites Us pages. One other thing this person may do is, in the introductory passage, when the sentence is "x band is a y genre band from z location", the genre will be made unnecessarily specific (example: "Paradise Lost is a heavy metal band" → "Paradise Lost is a Gothic Metal band") Here is an example of such an edit. Also, notice how the term "gothic metal" is capitalized, since capitalizing genres in such a manner is discouraged by wikipedia. The person has gone outside these areas, and has even performed valid edits, but such instances don't occur very often. This person usually revolves around articles that display info of bands or respective albums that are or were of the death/doom or gothic genres (ex. Paradise Lost, Anathema, Funeral, Tiamat, Cemetary, My Dying Bride), nu metal (ex. Soulfly, Korn, Marilyn Manson), thrash metal (ex. Metallica, Annihilator, Flotsam & Jetsam), and grunge, post-grunge or alternative genres (ex. Silverchair, Mudvayne, Nickelback, Staind). This person has operated through more than 35 IPs, all or most of which fit the name of 90.2xx.xxx.xxx; the first x digit can be, and usually is, a 1 or a 2; the two groups of three x's don't have to be three numbers exactly, but can be. I'm just stating that people should watch out for IPs that fit the above description, and if something can be done about this, then that would be cool. Also, sorry for the long post; I should probably specify that I'm not angry as I post this message, even though this is a problem, as stated earlier, which has been manifested for over a year. Thanks for reading. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 05:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Nirvana 2002
Does anyone have the Swedish Death Metal book? I want to expand Nirvana 2002's article and this book is apparently a major source. Anyway, other offline sources (i.e. magazines) would be helpful.--Cannibaloki 16:30, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Sonisphere Festival
This page Sonisphere Festival is going to become fairly cluttered/already is for a large part. The festival is expanding (eventually to worldwide) and is going to be going to several venues every year. Would it not be a good idea to make say a Sonisphere 2009/2010/2011 page and so on for line ups and detailed events. Whilst this can be a general overview of the history, which venues took place and which main bands were shared? Also, even as things are, bands are missing, information is unsourced and it all looks untidy. ANy help?23:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)Gedmundo (talk)
- I would support the splitting of the articles, if it is for the betterment of the Sonisphere information on wikipedia. If it stays as one article into the year of, say, 2017, it would potentially be really long and cumbersome, so separating each festival per year on wikipedia is something that I, personally, would advertise. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 02:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Just a thought. Would it be better to split into year or venue. Or indeed both? I think personally years work better, but for the continuing venues (say, Knebworth and Finland) where there's a continued development, it could be a good idea to give them their own pages.Gedmundo (talk) 13:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- As I stated, my original thought would be that of splitting it by year, but your idea isn't a bad idea, either. Maybe if each venue is notable enough, the article could be separated by venue. I don't think I'd promote separating the article per venue for all of the venues, but I would support it for the Finnish situation, considering the unusual and tragic circumstances surrounding it. But separating it per year is what would, in my opinion, be the preferrable option; then, there could be the separation of venues such as the Finnish one and the other necessary ones. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 20:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I agree with that. The one's that would probably deserve their own page would be the one's that have run over more than one year. (Finland, UK and possibly Spain and Sweden even though the latter 2 were different venues.)Gedmundo (talk) 21:44, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- As I stated, my original thought would be that of splitting it by year, but your idea isn't a bad idea, either. Maybe if each venue is notable enough, the article could be separated by venue. I don't think I'd promote separating the article per venue for all of the venues, but I would support it for the Finnish situation, considering the unusual and tragic circumstances surrounding it. But separating it per year is what would, in my opinion, be the preferrable option; then, there could be the separation of venues such as the Finnish one and the other necessary ones. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 20:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Just a thought. Would it be better to split into year or venue. Or indeed both? I think personally years work better, but for the continuing venues (say, Knebworth and Finland) where there's a continued development, it could be a good idea to give them their own pages.Gedmundo (talk) 13:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
AfD nomination of I Killed the Prom Queen
An article that you have been involved in editing, I Killed the Prom Queen, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Killed the Prom Queen (2nd nomination). Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jeepday (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the discography section of that page. It is sourced, but I have found two sources (one of them not reliable, the other could be reliable) that support the former discography information. If discogs.com is a reliable source, then that is the reliable source that I speak of. Here is the link. Any help concerning the discography or any part of the article is welcome. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 00:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I would like to nominate the korean Death core band FatalFear for entry.
Fatalfear,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FatalFear Tthe band and members are strong supporters of the korean metal and punk scenes and are currently in the process of bringing this style to the fore front in a variety of ways, both with their band as well as their indie Label(realize records), their club and regular events around South Korea.
The country has a long tradition of melodic music and this band is one of the few that incorporate traditional korean melodies into their guitar pieces. Which is a lot different to the huge korean pop market that sounds the same as any pop anywhere in the world. They are attempting to keep the culture alive in new ways and I think they deserve the mention. Metal Hammer, Arch Enemy, Korea News Network (KNN) and Powerplay magazine seem to agree. (as they have either been featured or are currently being interviewed on/for all the above).
Their page is currently marked for possible removal so please please support the growing scene internationally and current underground in korea, there's so much great metal out there that has yet to be heard. Everything from grind, black, power, prog to thrash. It is so hard for them to get notice out there so they depend on places like this to maintain both their status and foot hold in the scene internationally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.234.181.119 (talk) 05:48, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Proposed move
There is a discussion to move Heavy metal music to Heavy metal (music). —Gendralman (talk) 21:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Please chime in, one way or the other. Bearian (talk) 23:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Heavy Metal Subculture (was Metalhead)
The 'Metalhead' article has been a bit of a mess for a long time now with all sorts of OR and nonsense in there. It survived an AfD, but the consensus was clearly on a serious cleanup, which to date hasn't really happened. I chopped a few of the more ridiculous bits out over the last year, but it needed a more fundamental fix.
I've taken on board trying to sort this, and as a first move have renamed the article to Heavy Metal Subculture, which I think is more encyclopedic, better reflects the actual topic discussed and is less colloquial as there are lots of different names for Metal fans around the world.
With the new focus, I think the article can be improved to a pretty decent standard now. But it still needs some trimming for OR, better citations and a wider view of the culture, which is a bit narrow at the moment (likely because a lot of the existing refs come from one book).
I'd appreciate if any interested editors could cast an eye over it and clean up anything that catches thier attention. Quite appart from spreading the workload, I think the primary thing this article needs is a wider spectrum of viewpoints, and I definitely don't want to just replace the previous bias with my own! --ThePaintedOne (talk) 10:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
- Article move and cleanup is complete now. What's left needs some citations in a couple of places, and I'm not all that happy with the 'subculture' section. It's cited, but doesn't read to me as NPOV and I think could seriously do with a wider perspective. All assistance appreciated.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 21:28, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Any input would be greatly appreciated. Nergaal (talk) 20:03, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
The Iron Maidens article
Could editors from this WikiProject please add The Iron Maidens article unto their watchlist and help to improve the article? The article was basically written like a fan-site, and contained original research, material from unreliable sources (forumboard) and primary sources (band's website). The article was subject of heavy disruptions/vandalism, and thus was fully protected for 3 months. I have rewritten the article (removed unsourced material, removed material from unreliable sources, removed irrelevant material and added references from reliable verifiable sources). If you can find additional reliable verifiable sources for the article, please add them to the article. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 10:53, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
- I will add it to my watchlist. Thanks for bringing this up. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 23:26, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
The article Gods of Grind has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 11:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Discussion on Headbanging talk page.
There is currently a discussion concerning a sequence of images displaying a person headbanging while playing a musical instrument, probably during a live performance. The topic of interest for this discussion is whether or not the sequence of images should be on the article. For further information, see Talk:Headbanging#Possible additional image(s) and feel free to donate input and opinions. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 23:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Another editor and I are working on this article which is part of your project (I think) and we do not agree on what is and is not a copyright violation on the page. Much of the text can be find on other websites and what is and isn't a copyright violation isn't always clear. In my opinion, it's starting to look like we're not going to come to a conclusion so I'd like to ask editors here to contribute to the page and/or the conversation regarding the text. Any help with the article would be greatly appreciated. OlYellerTalktome 05:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I have added Linkin Park discography for peer review. If someone can check the list and see if anything wrong it would help. Thanks --Neo139 (talk) 03:54, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
- Linkin Park isn't exactly metal, you shouldv'e kept this at WP Rock. • GunMetal Angel 09:14, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
This article is proposed for deletion. The reason stated: No evidence from WP:RS that band meets WP:MUSIC. No recordings on major labels or notable indie labels. This is non-sense. Peaceful Death And Pretty Flowers was released on Metal Blade and distributed by Warner Brothers. Are these 2 not major labels? I totally object the deletion of the article.
--Leonid —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metaleonid (talk • contribs) 15:18, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- You may remove the deletion notice and then explain why at Talk:Dead Horse (band). If you are not sure as to how to do this feel free to ask on my talk page. J04n(talk page) 16:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Need a proofreader
Hello guys. I really need a proofreader who can read one page of text and correct a little lame language into a good English in my article Infestum (black metal band from Belarus). Thanks. ~Нирваньчик~ ⊤άλҟ 11:16, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Do we have a policy or guideline about music videos appearing in articles like in the above? I haven't seen any other articles that do show videos of the bands. Mo ainm~Talk 17:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- It's good to see videos on Wikipedia. It's rarely done because most band videos are copyright-protected (and fair use is difficult). These are Creative Commons (File:Seven Kingdoms - Stormborn.ogv and File:Seven Kingdoms in the Studio.ogv) so they're fine. But they should be tied into the article better, not just stuck in as a video gallery. —Gendralman (talk) 23:57, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Heavy Metal articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Heavy Metal articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:33, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Need a Good Article reviewer
I've nominated Killing Is My Business... and Business Is Good! as a GA after reworking the article a bit, it needs a review to pass. Any Megadeth fans? ~Bruce Campbell (talk) 17:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Reverted edit in SOAD discography
Hi all, I just reverted this edit since I felt there was no reason for deleting the ratings... As I wrote in the user talk, I'm not an active user in the Music projects so I don't know if there has been any decision in this matter, in case please just rollback me. Thanks! --WikiKiwi (askme) 16:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Your reversion was a good call. There is absolutely no reason to delete all the ratings. However, a certain amount of them are unsourced and need not be on there; I'm sure that's not the reason the person removed them, though. I'll take care of that on that page. Thank you. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 21:52, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Good! Also I hope not to sound rude, but I'd keep an eye on the user's contribs since they generally looks ok, but I cannot really tell if they always are (and he's editing a lot). --WikiKiwi (askme) 00:21, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the tip. I will want to do that. 03:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Good! Also I hope not to sound rude, but I'd keep an eye on the user's contribs since they generally looks ok, but I cannot really tell if they always are (and he's editing a lot). --WikiKiwi (askme) 00:21, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
The article Soulreaper has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- seems to fail WP:BAND, clearly fails WP:V If my assessment is incorrect add reference supporting to prevent WP:AFD, links under "Discography" need references or prod
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 11:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
According to the band's article, nearly every single they released reached #1 on the Hot 100. This is not true. They didn't even have one. Sbrianhicks (talk) 15:09, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- It was vandalism by 98.254.40.176. Fixed now. Prolog (talk) 17:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Carnifex
Ummm I'm thinking about a request to re-title the article for Carnifex (band) to just "Carnifex". The title for "Carnifex" itself is a disambiguation page, but if you'd notice there's not really all that much of a distinction over than just the band. There's barely any other pages that have the title as just "Carnifex" and plus the band is the most relevant thing on there, when the page was made they weren't that popular, but now they're rising even more and don't even compare to the hem of a Wild Cards character (the only other page on Wikipedia that has the article name as just "Carnifex"). So moving the page to just "Carnifex" but having the disambig page for everything else would be a good idea if you ask me, but I would like as many other peoples' thoughts on this before I take action. • GunMetal Angel 09:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry I've written this so late, but here are my thoughts. While I am still thinking about that other page with the carnifex name, it does seem that the Carnifex band is the most relevant entity by the name of Carnifex on wikipedia. Therefore, I think that I would give the moving my personal green light. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 08:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Mkay, go for it -- GunMetal Angel 18:30, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I've moved the disambiguation page, but I just requested the band page be moved, because of how moving is more complex when the desired name already is a redirect page to another. See my post on the band's talk page. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 22:12, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- Mkay, go for it -- GunMetal Angel 18:30, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Bon Jovi
What is going on with the Bon Jovi article? Over the past 3 years, the "glam metal" and "heavy metal" tags in the genre listing have disapeared and reappeared numerous times. After the release of The Circle, the band was tagged as "Hard rock, heavy metal, glam metal," each with several references. Then a few weeks ago, it went back to being simply "hard rock." Now it's back to "hard rock, glam metal." Every time I add the heavy metal tag to the band, an album, or a song (with a reference), it gets erased. What's going on? Sbrianhicks (talk) 22:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Musicmight
Is it a source fit to be cited on wikipedia? I've seen one editor criticize it as an unreliable source; I think their claim had to do with original research. There have been at least two occasions on musicmight where I've seen information displayed there that I have only seen there. I may add more details later, because it is getting kind of late over here. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 05:08, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Alex Gregory
I wonder if people would like to have a look at Alex Gregory? Is the subject notable? Thanks and regards. --Kleinzach 09:32, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
- I would say yes, most of the refs in the article are not independent but there are independent sources in there that aren't online but appear legit. I also found these [1][2] and I think this is also legit. J04n(talk page) 13:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to have a look and possibly comment at this deletion review. Cheers. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 09:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
GA reassessment of Black Tide
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article following its nomination for reassessment. You are being notified as your project banner is on the talk page. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Black Tide/GA1. As the article is in very poor shape, I have de-listed it 
. Please renominate at WP:GAN when it meets the good article criteria. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 05:17, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Heavy montreal 2011 3 edition
√Which band you think they should have this year??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dec77 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, whichever one(s) is/are sourced to be there, I guess. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 04:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Requested move for New Album (Boris album)
There is currently a discussion concerning renaming said article to New Album. Interested parties can click go to Talk:New Album (Boris album)#Requested move. Thank you. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 04:53, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Requesting the Deleted english language page of Christophe Szpajdel
There currently is no English language page for logo designer Christophe Szpajdel, his English page was deleted several years back and I am trying to find an administrator to provide that page. He has pages in Belgan, German and Japanese but not English. He has numerous exhibitions, been featured in many publications and designed thousands of logos for metal / black metal / death metal bands among other work. Thank you.
(UTC)