![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. 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 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
See this discussion here: Talk:Dio#Dio or Dio (band) regarding the proposed page move for the Dio article to Dio (band). Wether B (talk) 02:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
"Killing Yourself to Live", "After Forever" and "Solitude" are currently discussed for deletion. Does anybody have secondary literature on the topic to expand (and possibly rescue) the articles? Also, which notable bands did cover those songs? --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 00:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:13, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Hi WP:METAL! The article Totimoshi was recently created and speedily deleted by an administrator. I believed that it was notable and took the liberty of restoring it with additional text and sources, which I believe establish notability. However, the article is still in very bad shape. As I have little knowledge of the subject, I believe that your WikiProject can be of great assistance here! Thanks, Ynhockey (Talk) 00:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
On that page, there is a section that disturbs me to the point that I am writing this on the Wikiproject Metal discossion page. I typed something like this on its talk page, but I haven't received any responses, and that was after a few days. I would usually delete sources to forums, but there is a lot of information from the forum and the forum is the officiall forum of the Orphaned Land website. I the situation has gonesomewhat out of hand; there is not an editing dispute or anything, but there has been information added every several days and the whole section is unencyclopedic. I'm bringing this up on this site because I want someone who is more experienced in cases like this to do what would be appropriate and request what I should do if there is a similar event elsewhere. Thank you. BTC 21:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
The problem has been officially fixed. BTC 22:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi all, I created and uploaded a graph depicting Heavy metal genealogy. I got the idea, after I saw this file, showing genealogy of Cuban music. I was trying to understand the relationship between numerous heavy metal genres. It was difficult when there are so many of them. But after I created this I understood systematic evolution of Metal. Now there is no need for me to read thorough all the article and spend a lot of time to comprehend Metal. I dearly hope that would be the case for most of the readers too. After all one picture is worth 1000 words, right?
About Picture: I simply created this using Word 2007. For the simplicity I intentionally left out fusion genre. Notably, Alternative metal, Nu metal and Sludge. I hope to create a separate graph for fusion genre too. I would like you to comment on accuracy of the picture. If there are someone with greater graphical ability, I'd love you to go ahead and create a better picture. I prefer if we can reduced the number of arrows, if it is correct. For example, Speed metal and Thrash metal have same parents. would not it better if there is only the arrow from Speed to Thrash, providing if it is the correct case. Node of NWOBHM left white to indicate that it is a movement rather than a genre. Love to hear comments from you. Cheers!--Chanaka L (talk) 04:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Colours I used are taken from articles infobox. For ex. Hip Hop would have Blue node. Based on these I'll redraw the graph tonight(SL time) and post it tomorrow. Until then, so long!--Chanaka L (talk) 07:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Looks cool, fraid I find all the sub genere names too confusing though in general. Me, I just like to rock, variations in style come as they may! Dr. Blofeld White cat 11:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Cool. The whole thing is cool. But it lacks several things. As mentioned above there are many fusion genres and also many genres such as avant-garde/experimental metal and folk metal with further non-metal influences such as avant-garde/experimental music or folk/world music. some metal genres also need to bee added (pretty much of the list by Chanaka L). I would also add technical death metal which comes from prog and death; and brutal death metal (subgenre of death). Good idea in general. cheers.-- LYKANTROP ✉ 12:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I think the whole issue with avant-garde metal is that it's influenced by virtually every other style of metal and many outside sources at the same time- avant-garde music in general is so difficult to define that it's hard to see its place in a graph like this. Two metal bands may fall under the "avant-garde" description but sound completely differt and have two separate sets of influences. Also worth mentioning- possible influence of power metal on viking metal? Quorthon himself mentioned in influence Manowar had on his Viking-era work. Just a thought. It's hard to be both accurate and concise with these things, but I appreciate the work you put into it. Very good so far! Thee darcy (talk) 16:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I would say this is not a original research, can be verifiable. In specific individual cases it is debatable. Editors can use above citations to source articles.
Found out some answers to some of the questions on my way of research.
My resolution: Graphs are fairly alright. some of the disputed origins can be readily discussed and be fixed while some tough cases need further citations. some articles need to be sourced too. Hope I can find help. Cheers!--Chanaka L (talk) 05:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the new graph, I'd say that first thing you need to do is to keep the timeline chronology from top to the bottom as you did in the first one, which was actually better arranged. It makes the whole thing transparent, otherwise it is really chaotic. You could put a timeline on the left: put there a line of boxes with "1960s", "70s", "80s", "90s", "2000s" etc. and keep the genres next to the time period of their origin :) -- LYKANTROP ✉ 13:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
It will be better to get into the fusions genres once after we have better citations in the articles. I'm pretty confident about the new version of the picture. Cheers!--Chanaka L (talk) 12:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Question what is the purpose of this discussion over a graphic that will never be used in an any Wikipedia article about heavy metal??? Talk pages are supposed to be for discussing the article. This little amateur looking graphic is all fine and good on some teen chat page. But, in the end, it is a pov pic. Perhaps efforts could be put into improving articles rather than attempting to create something will will never be used here. The Real Libs-speak politely 13:35, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Best of luck for every one.--Chanaka L (talk) 05:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree with the consensus that this is a personal opinion graph based on original research. It is also very amateur in design and not something you would want to see in a quality encyclopedia. It should not be used for any heavy metal related pages. GripTheHusk (talk) 10:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
An editor is disputing the sourced genres of the band given in the infobox, and is insisting that there had previously been a consensus for the inclusion a genre term that was not as well sourced, when the term had been long disputed, as evidenced by the article's three archives. So far, the editor in question has not attempted to instigate an edit war, and most editors involved with the discussion have behaved within Wikipedia's etiquette rules, although the disputing editor has made a number of statements that appear to treat disagreeing editors as being wrong or ignorant. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 11:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC))
A survey has been started on the SOAD talk page regarding classifying them as a nu metal band, if interested please participate. J04n(talk page) 15:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello, there is currently a proposal for a revised Featured List criteria which would see the addition of a stand-alone list/content forking/notability criterion. If it passes, several of this project's FLs will be affected by it and could be delisted. Any input from any project members would be very welcome. Thanks, Scorpion0422 14:57, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I read the May 2009 issue of Revolver Magazine, and I want to source page 82 on there. The article on page 82 has sort of a long title, and I'm wondering what sort of title abridgement I could use to make it optically superior. Is there any help that I could receive for abridging the title of that magazine article? Or is the title fine as it is, which I am doubting at the moment? Thank you. The reference will be displayed below.
BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 00:02, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
This article is from the New York Times but as this archived response on the reliable sources noticeboard says, even reliable sources can make mistakes and we should use editorial judgment. The article invents non-existent neologism ("trench metal", "new york squatter metal", "extreme ambient", "machine assisted metal", "turncoat metal"), mixes up genres (sludge/stoner, black ambient/darkwave), and misidentify bands (Pantera/Sepultura/Brutal Truth/Kreator as power metal), etc. If someone is using this article to cite something on wikipedia, is it not fair to ask the editor to provide other sources instead of or in addition to this NYT article? Thanks. --Anarchodin (talk) 09:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
the article thrash metal has a quality rating of start. people have improved on it and im sure its quality should be better than start. can someone get the quality rating up to date please?. thanks. CallMeAndrew (talk) 14:37, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Not sure about this one; maybe you guys can save it. Also, just a reminder, you now have article alerts (see "proposed deletion" on your wikiproject page) where you can see articles like this one that could use your input. - Dank (push to talk) 23:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of awards and nominations received by Rage Against the Machine for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Scorpion0422 15:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I was thinking that this whole new wave of thrash metal wave that's happening, deserves it's own entry. It could describe what events triggered it and what bands are a part of it. Maybe something about Thrash Unlimited too.
Just an idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.185.211.142 (talk) 17:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone think that this is completely useless and should be deleted quickly from Wikipedia? The Real Libs-speak politely 16:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Someone has nominated the John Bush (musician) article to be deleted. My agf is that the person knows nothing about the subject and it is just a simmple blind-ignorance nom. Should be an easy keep. The Real Libs-speak politely 12:50, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of awards and nominations received by Soundgarden for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
I have nominated List of Metallica band members for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Scorpion0422 14:48, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I believe the discussion of this article being proposed for deletion should be wrapped up. It has been six days since the discussion started (which, to my knowledge, is longer than these discussions usually are), and nobody has put any input on this subject ever since I did at 4:07 wikipedia time on June 15. Also, everyone who has displayed input on that article (other than the person who nominated it for deletion in the first place) is in agreement that the article should be kept. I'm pretty sure I don't have the authority to wrap up the discussion myself; therefore, this message is directed to someone with such an authority. Thank you in advance.
BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 17:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
PS: Yesterday, I posted a similar message in the talk page of 1349 (band), but to no avail. I just thought that was notable to point out.
Thank you. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 04:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Dream Theater discography/archive2 and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Devin Townsend discography/archive2 need eyes desperately. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 19:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Black Sabbath Covers is a waste of space. I have prod'd the page. But it is easily and AfD or even a speedy delete. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
! ese symbols | >. When are those symbols even used on wikipedia at all? Maybe in some reference names, but that's the only thing that I can think of where those symbols can be used. My official verdict would be to delete this page, which, at the moment, embodies botched work. It is a pretty useless article. It is not like all the covers will be on there anyways. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 21:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I just discovered that there is no page for the band Canopy, but there are pages for three of their albums: During Day One (album), Will and Perception (album), and Serene Catharsis (album). If the albums are notable enough for pages a page should be created for the band, if the band isn't notable enough for a page the album pages should be deleted. I suspect that the latter is true but I am not expert enough in death metal to be sure. J04n(talk page) 19:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Your input is requested at a move discussion here. Neelix (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I have reviewed Desolate North for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
There is an anonymous genre warrior who keeps adding in the aforementioned article's infobox that the album is gothic metal. It was decided in the talk page that, unless if a reliabe source was attached to it being considered gothic metal, that there would not be any mention of that genre in the article. In spite of that, and even in spite of warning this individual about this decision multiple times, the person is pompous enough to keep editing the article with the same crap without edit summaries. This person is clearly a genre warrior and there needs to be something done about this. For the revision history of For Lies I Sire, click here. For the user contributions of 58.172.146.242 (the anonymous disruptor), click here. I know that I do not have the authority to ban the disruptor; since he/she has been doing this for several months, that is what I would request. If not, then I will trust those who have the authority to deal with this disruptor.
BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 03:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I requested a popular pages report for this WikiProject (for more info, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Article alerts: "13 July 2009 – A new tool listing the most popular page...").--Canniba loki 04:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I made another request here, someone has something against it or any suggestions?--Canniba loki 05:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Bleeding Through/GA2. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I posted information about the line-up of the band on the profile, becuase there was not its own section about it yet. Is that the current line-up of the band? If so, what is wrong with it? BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 02:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I believe that page needs a re-evaluation. I do not believe that stub status fits the article anymore. Since it was first assigned as stub status, I, along with many other people, have added additional information to the article. I don't request this very often, but I will now, since the article was last evaluated on June 10, 2008 and it was like this when it was evaluated. It was four days old when that happened. Thank you. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 17:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Just thought I'd let people know in this project that the Venom album The Waste Lands article is up for deletion. People involved with this project should make comments about it. Cheers. 205.211.50.10 (talk) 16:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of WarCry band members for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:13, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Metal to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Popular pages.
The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr. Z-man 02:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Doing some edits on metal album articles, I see that some referenced sections and links to reviews have been deleted, with the notice "reference missing". Going further back in the edit history, i see that references links to reviews in various metal zines have been deleted with the explanation "remove spam". When restoring those links and deleted sections, Wikipedia gives me an alert that I am linking to a blacklisted URL - metal-observer dot com.
What I do in this case is that I simply transform the Cite Web tag into a Citation tag, without URL. But I see that many other articles have been pruned and the references to M.O. simply removed... And BTW, the Metal Observer wikipedia article has been deleted in May (only surviving on the Danish wikipedia). Looks like I missed that battle (and no single comment here?!). --Irina666 (talk) 09:41, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
AfD page is here. I pretty much stumbled upon this article at random, but it looks to me like it might be notable. I'm pretty out of touch with even the UK Metal scene though, never mind the Sri Lankan one. It would be useful if any project members who are more informed on whether this really is an emerging genre or not could take a look and give thier opinion (either way) on the AfD.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 07:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Dream Theater band members for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by SRE.K.A.L.24 (talk • contribs)
There is a conflict about the album's leak on the wikipedia article that is mentioned in the subject. Usually, stuff like leaks are non-notable, but on the talk page, there is a notable exchange about this that has some informatin backing the alleged notablilty of the leak. Other opinions in this matter would be nice about this matter. Thanks. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 00:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
I am acquiring resources for a rewrite of Extol and found an old reference to a German metal site called [www.metalglory.de MetalGlory]. There is a comprehensive interview with the band, as well as interviews with stars like Slayer and Queensryche. I am wondering if anybody has run across the site before and more importantly whether they are a reliable source. Conducting interviews with notable bands is a plus sign, but that doesn't automatically mean they are reliable.
The other source is MusicMight. It is a rock music database site started by metal authority Gary Sharpe-Young who wrote the useful text The New Wave of Heavy Metal. At first, MusicMight appears to be a wiki as it allows users to edit content on artist profiles. Edits must be examined by a moderator. However, the biography of the artist cannot be altered; I registered an account and experimented. The biography for The Chariot was also taken directly from his book; I assume the other biographies are contained in other books he has written. Is the site reliable for biographies? -- Noj r (talk) 08:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
There has been a recent review posted on there which I question the notability of, and want extra opinions on. Here it is. Would papelmag.com be a notable source for reviews? Because I am either editing the format of the review or deleting it from the Design Your Universe page. Also, I think it may be notable to point out that my computer doesn't like me visiting there, since it kind of gives me a message after a segment of time (not immediately, though) stating an "Internet explorer cannot display this web page" message. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 03:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
There was an illegal move performed by moving the info from the first article mentioned to the last article mentioned. I was going to move it correctly, but someone else copied and pasted the information to the Ben Carter (musician) profile before I got to do that. Proof that it was illegally moved is that in the Ben Carter (Evile) article, there is a long log of history, while the Ben Carter (musician) article has only one edit's worth of history behind it. I believe this is worthy of being attennded to very soon. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 03:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
PS: By the way, I do believe it is notable to point out how I learned about illegal moves the hard way by doing the same thing back in 2007 with the Emmure page.
Would that count as a studio album, considering its status as a cover album? My vote is no, but some anonymous users beg to differ and are counting it as such, marking The Great Misdirect as their sixth studio album and Colors as their fifth studio album. Colors and The Great Misdirect are their fourth and fifth studio albums respectively with original material. I would like some extra opinions on this matter. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 23:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
This bootleg is listed to deletion, can someone help establishing its notability? For me its just another non-notable bootleg, I can't find any professional review throughout Internet.--Canniba loki 23:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
This article requires major cleanup, I have been working on it for a couple of days.T.tyrael (talk) 10:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gathering_(band)
I rewrote almost the entire Quo Vadis article but I'm not sure what the quality of the article is. Could someone help? Limaj daas (talk) 22:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)