Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Metal/Archive 11

Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15

General Consensus Original Research

Much of the research on metal is all first hand and original research. This is highly unavoidable. This is a genre we're talking about here that has many accepted facts based on popular opinion within the culture, but many are completely non-cite-able. This is cause for many things that should be included, such as "brutal death metal" - widely regarded and recognized as a sub-genre/style of death metal - to be left out because there are no verifiable resources.

I have a proposition to help change this. Anyone at all interested in helping out with a publication I'm trying to make called "Metal Education" (that's the name of the project I'm working on, most likely will not be the name of the publication). I want to get a published source that will become regarded as a verifiable resource. All I'm doing is making a huge amalgamation of the most widely accepted opinions and "facts" about metal. There have been many publications like this which are actually refuted by the metal community as being wrong in many aspects. As a musician who has been listening to this style of music for over 16 years now, as well as being a decent writer, I can word things right so that all sides of all arguments can agree on the content of the book and/or film - whichever medium I decide to take it.

I can do many things that others (such as sociologists and anthropologists) couldn't do, such as explain musically why something is or is not metal, or regarded as such by the general metal community.

I promise you this is not spam or anything like that. Visit my user talk page and let me know if you're interested and I will let you know how you can contact me (anything from e-mails to Skype, Yahoo!, Windows Live Messenger, etc). You can also simply respond to this section.

You can ask me information about the project, about me and my qualifications in doing such a project, or just general metal-related questions. Anathematized one (talk) 06:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Citing from Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Self-published and questionable sources: Self-published sources (online and paper): "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media—whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable." I don't want to discourage you, but you should consider publishing your own book first after you have become a widely recognized music journalist.--  LYKANTROP  ✉ 08:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
"Largely not acceptable" does not mean "totally not acceptable." Trust me, when everyone sees the wording, it will be written in a highly credible tone after tons of research and interviews. I also don't plan on "self-publishing" either. I'm going to get support and get it published by a reputable publishing source for metal related books, thus making it that much more credible of a source. Besides, there is no becoming "widely recognized" - at least by typical Wikipedia and mass mainstream standards - in metal journalism while maintaining credibility with the metal subculture. This is part of the problem in not being able to find information out there for metal as a cite-able source, although we all know certain things about it to be true. Also, I myself am not going to be citing my book as a resource, I'll leave that up to the others who edit Wikipedia, thus further making it credible. Anathematized one (talk) 00:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
EDIT: Besides, which would you rather have, a book written by a widely recognized journalist with little knowledge in the field he is writing on other than what he catches from the research for the ONE particular piece he's writing or a book written by somebody who isn't widely recognized as a journalist but has several years experience in the field he's writing the book on? Exactly... Anathematized one (talk) 03:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
EDIT AGAIN: I've already started on it and got the basics down for the introduction for certain parts and it's several pages long, and in my opinion, without being boring. I can post it on a sub-page of my user page if you want to see an example of a rough draft of just the introductory paragraph to a section or two. Anathematized one (talk) 03:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Book-class

Since several Wikipedia-Books are music/metal related, could this project adopt the book-class? This would really help WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as the WikiProject Metal people can oversee books like Alice in Chains: The Complete Guide much better than we could as far as merging, deletion, content, and such are concerned. Eventually there probably will be a "Books for discussion" process, so that would be incorporated in the Article Alerts. I'm placing this here rather than on the template page since several taskforces would be concerned.

There's an article in this week Signpost if you aren't familiar with Wikipedia-Books and classes in general. Thanks. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 20:34, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind if this place had its own book class, considering those circumstance. I vote for the proposition. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 23:34, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Anyone opposed to this? I can make the change pretty much anytime you want. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 06:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Alright, since no one said no, I made the changes and tagged all books I though were metal-related (probably made some mistakes on the way, and maybe missed a few, but hey, it's a start). They can be found at Category:Book-Class Heavy Metal articles (which is populated by the banner {{WP Metal|class=book}}).
If you want to write more books, simply start the book creator (click "Create a book", in the print/export toolbox on the left of your screen), and follow instructions. The easiest/fastest way to create a book is to go to a category, add all the pages in that category ("Add this category to your book"), and review the book ("Show book") to create chapters and whatnot. See Help:Books for details. It's pretty easy to use, just toy around with it and you'll figure it out in no time. If something's unclear or confusing, just drop me a line and I'll help as best I can. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 03:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Archiving

I just made an archive ten for this wikiproject discussion page. It really needed, considering that this discussion page does have a history of archived discussion pages with fewer discussions on them. If you want any of these discussions remaining to go into discussion ten, or want some of the more recent discussions remoevd from the archive page and replaced here, feel free to voice your opinion on the matter. If I did anything worth criticizing, feel free to voice your opinion on that as well. Thanks. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 02:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Removal of reviews from the album infobox

This is a notification of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums regarding the removal of reviews from the album infobox. The discussion has reached consensus to remove the reviews, though is still accepting further input into the matter. We are especially requiring more discussion on what steps to take next. Your input would be appreciated on what is a matter that will affect a lot of music articles. kiac. (talk-contrib) 09:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Opeth - Mellotron Heart

Per Backtable's suggestion, I'm bringing this topic here. From what I've been able to tell, Mellotron Heart was released as a single song on a physical promo disc that shipped with some copies of the special edition of Watershed. It also was available digitally to those who bought the album. It was also released as a B-side on the Burden single.The question is whether it should be considered a single referenced on the category, and in the Watershed infobox, and whether it constitutes an article of its own. I personally think it shouldn't- but an argument has been made that it was a single primarily utilizing digital distribution. I have not been able to find any real references to it being released commercially or to radio, independent of the album, or any independent coverage. (Radio not being a requirement for notability- unless it didn't see commercial distribution and release). I would personally redirect to either Watershed or Porcelain Heart. Thoughts? At least I'm not arguing about their genre. 136.181.195.10 (talk) 20:28, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Merging

The above anonymous user has requested that Mellotron Heart be merged into Porcelain Heart. The above poster had this to say on my talkpage:


I think that the Mellotron Heart merge to Porcelain Heart wouldn't be a bad idea, considering that the Mellotron Heart page does not have much information about its assigned topic. However, I do not want to do that just yet, because I would want a consensus to be made. Any thoughts? You can post your thoughs on this talk page, the talk page of any other wikiproject I post this in, or the talk page of Mellotron Heart or Porcelain Heart.

BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 05:23, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I will get started on that soon. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 19:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

PROD of Clean Vocals

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Clean vocals. Thank you. --Jubilee♫ clipman 01:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Contest to boost activity

I recently saw this on another wikiproject. Since the HMM wikiproject hasn't seen much activity as it used to, how about we make a similar contest, possibly starting in February or so? This can really only bring positive contributions, so I think it will be a great idea. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 18:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I would sign up and I would like to suggest naming in honor of The Rev. J04n(talk page) 19:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
I would sign up for that as well, and even though I'm not huge on Avenged Sevenfold, it would be suitable to name it after James Owen Sullivan, considering how he unexpectedly died recently. This contest does seem like something that would interest me. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 22:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
So it's a go? Should I start coming up with scoring tables and such? We could have signups from Jan 15 - Jan 31 and have the contest start in February. We need a name and multiple judges though. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 01:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
You can go ahead and start the tables and other stuff if you want. The contest being started in February is cool with me. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 01:37, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I have User:TheWeakWilled/HMMContest started for today, feel free to change it as you see fit. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 02:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The activity in this wikiproject is low because most of the editors, who created this wikiproject and wrote all of the featured articles, left wikipedia. The guys, who did all the featured articles, retired and do not edit anymore. If you want a new activity in this wikiproject, you need a new "generation" of editors who want to spend weeks doing research and bringing articles to FACR. Such a contest won't help if there are no people to participate. WikiProject Military history has many active editors. WikiProject Metal doesn't anymore. But of course feel free to find some new ones...--  LYKANTROP  ✉ 10:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Maybe send a reminder to the members in the WikiProject reminding them about the Wikiproject? Are we allowed to remove inactive users from the list? For example the first user listed has zero contributions overall. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 15:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, the list is basically worthless because people just shove their names into it without having a clue what is going on. I don't know if anyone is allowed to remove the names, but I don't think it's necessary to remove them. It's a waste of time to figure out who's active and who's not. I would rather write an article :)
As far as I can talk about retired editors (...I was working ca. at the same time and I am basically one of them...), there's no point in contacting them. They've done here what they wanted and that's it. They pushed the articles they were interested in to FAs or GAs and they're done. And some of them are even fed up with Wikipedia in general. Except for that, these "veteran" editors are definitely not in a mood to make some competitions.
The only thing I can tell you is to find some people who are new to the Wiki or some people who are still interested in editing like Backtable or maybe User:Gunmetal Angel. There are also some active people in Wikipedia:SLIPKNOT, but they obviously have their own, well organized work to do. Good luck though...--  LYKANTROP  ✉ 19:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
About eliminating members, I've done it before for a wikiproject. It was for Wikiproject Guitarists. Spike Wilbury, the founder of the project, assigned it for a general wikiproject cleanup for anyone to pick up on. I volunteered and ended up doing it. While there was 60 members originally, I ended up cutting it down to 32 members. Since then, five additional members have joined the project, some of whom were originally removed from the list. See the wikiproject's talk page. I'll be willing to do it again if it is necessary. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 20:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Well nevertheless if there is a contest or not, we have to get more activity here. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 20:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I can agree with that. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 20:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
How about something similar to Template:Wikiproject iPhone OS Invite. The people here that are active look at top editors using this tool from articles that we actively edit/our favorite metal bands, and try to find people that may want to join. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 20:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Good idea. We can send such invites to people for activity's sake. I'm sure there are people that would be interested in this. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 21:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Reassess?

Killing in the Name has gone to number one in the UK since it was last assessed. I've also worked to balance the article with content, so it is not just about recent news. I reintroduced a lot of removed content and found citations for most of it. I took a look at the Project music to see how a good article should be arranged and tried to fit the content to headings similar to what others were using. I reckon the article is no longer C class and more likely B class or higher. Hoping maybe someone might be willing to reassess the article and perhaps suggest ways to further improve it, details I may have overlooked or lost perspective on since I've been editing it quite a lot. Hope this was the right place to ask. -- Horkana (talk) 01:52, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

To me it's still C-class. This article needs more improvement to become B-class.--Canniba loki 02:39, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Improvements ... such as? -- Horkana (talk) 04:32, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Removal of unnessary non-free media, removal of lists, getting rid of recentism (per the template there). With some work, I'm convinced the article can be brought to GA. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 12:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Non-free media? Album covers and audio sample. I suppose thirty seconds seems a bit long for fair use but some kind of audio file demonstrating the riff seems essential. The second album cover is not really notable and hard to justify. There is more I can do to clean up the recentisms, it was a lot worse when it was tagged, but there is a need to balance WP:NOTNEWS with the fact that getting to number 1 will probably remain the most notable thing about the song despite it being recent news. There are some places where the lists can be cleaned up into better prose, but I'd hate to see editors giving into the lazy temptation to just remove the bullet points as if that makes the article any different. Thanks for giving me some perspective on it, I'll try to do some more work on the article. I might also make a copy of this on the Talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Horkana (talk) 23:00, 10 January, 2010 (UTC)
The "Australasia cover" has to go. While I am a huge fan of alternate covers, wikipedia doesn't allow them, unless they add to the article. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 23:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
While rechecking the article references one of the Australian articles drew attention to the alternative cover - noting how the picture of the monk is much smaller - so I was able to reuse that reference. That may help justify including the alternative cover but even if it doesn't the article has a new section Killing in the Name#Artwork that explains in words what the images show, which is in any case good for projects such as http://mobile.wikipedia.org.
Before I was working off the example of some of the featured articles but after quite a bit of searching I've found instructions at Category:Song articles missing an audio sample which seem to suggest the sound file is within fair use, but a shorter clip could still be representative if anyone wanted to re-edit it.
Still pondering how to rephrase other sections of the article but making progress. Again thanks for the feedback. -- Horkana (talk) 00:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Portal news

{{Portal|Heavy metal}}
Hi guys ...just FYI portal has had an upgrade in its look with a new section to draw attention to this project as seen bellow!!...
Could someone update the news... i dont want you to loss your FA status!! If anything is wrong pls let me know!!!...Buzzzsherman (talk) 20:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for discussion over at Deftones

I need some feedback over at the article Deftones. Anyone up to helping out? (Sugar Bear (talk) 20:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC))

Article in need of incubation

If there are any Steel Prophet or Hellion fans out there that want to work on an article, you may want to look at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Glenn Cannon (bassist). Happy editing J04n(talk page) 23:31, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Reminder template

Hello WikiProject Metal/Archive 11, you have received this notice because you have placed your name on the list of members of WikiProject Metal. We are currently looking to make the wikiproject more active, and in doing so, we need to have a list of active members on the wikiproject. If you wish to stay an active part of wikiproject metal, please add your username to Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Active Users. Conversely, if you wish to leave the wikiproject, please remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Members. Thank you.

Is what I have made (it is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Reminder). Of course, edit it as you wish. Near the end of the week I'll post it on the user talk pages of the members. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 20:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Some users that never contributed to the project should be "automatically" removed from the list.--Canniba loki 21:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Users A through and including D has been taken care of. I have deleted names of people with no contributions, adding them self to the list as the only contribution, and indef blocked. If each person reading this just checks 3 letters, the list can be cleared up in no time. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 21:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, what are you considering as "no contributions"? No posts on this page? J04n(talk page) 21:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
No contributions to wikipedia. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 21:39, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
No contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general. What do you think of organizing users in the order they joined the project?--Canniba loki 21:42, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I personally don't mind it, but keep in mind may people have joined early on, and aren't active anymore. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 22:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Starting to post this on user talk pages now... TheWeakWilled (T * G) 20:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Add the Portal to that template...if you like i can do now!!..Buzzzsherman (talk) 21:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Shit, I should have done that. I just posted that on every member's page. Sorry. :( TheWeakWilled (T * G) 21:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
What we can do is later on send out a newsletter, and put the portal on that newsletter. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 21:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Did you add the template or all the code ..i will add it !!!Buzzzsherman (talk) 21:12, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 Done -->
Hello WikiProject Metal/Archive 11, you have received this notice because you have placed your name on the list of members of WikiProject Metal. We are currently looking to make the wikiproject more active, and in doing so, we need to have a list of active members on the wikiproject. If you wish to stay an active part of wikiproject metal, please add your username to Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Active Users. Conversely, if you wish to leave the wikiproject, please remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Members.

Thank you.

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Heavy metal/News

Resolved

I put an update tag on it. There are only three news bulletins on here, and the most recent news was from November 30, 2007. Should this be resurrected or deleted? Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 21:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

You can use the events that are listed on 2010 in heavy metal music.--Canniba loki 02:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
I updated it with a couple events since December, just off the top of my head. This is in no way detailed, but there is at least something there now. H2ostra (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Does The Rev's death count as a metal event? perhaps that should be added. H2ostra (talk) 08:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I see no reason why not, be bold add it. J04n(talk page) 10:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced metal BLPs

There has been a fair amount of talk about this project becoming more active and now is the perfect time. There are about 60,000 unsourced BLPs that are in threat of deletion, I'm sure there are many in this project included. WikiProject Australia has put together a list of all pages with their project and intersected it with the unreferenced BLP list and its members are actively sourcing the article, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Unreferenced BLPs. I'm sure there is someone on this project with the technical ability to create such a list for this project, I'm not, but I will source the articles once identified. J04n(talk page) 12:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

There are also a lot of pages on BLPs that aren't notable. Still, we should work to add sources to these articles. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 15:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
What kind of work is needed for such a list? Is it a bot? If so, then I'll just put it out there that I have no bots under my name. Do the members manually add their suggestions on the list? Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 23:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
I left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australia/Unreferenced BLPs to see if whoever created it could help us. J04n(talk page) 00:54, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
The list has been created: Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Unreferenced BLPs. There are only 128 names on the list so with some teamwork we can knock this off pretty quickly. Each of these pages needs to have references added to them, without them they will be deleted. As TheWeakWilled pointed out that some probably should be deleted, I agree, this isn't a crusade to keep everything. So if you run across something that you don't think is notable feel free to take the normal appropriate action (prod, AfD). After adding sources to the article be sure to remove the {{BLP unsourced}} tag from the top of the page. If you are not sure about one, feel free to post any questions on this page. J04n(talk page) 11:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, many wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

  1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
  2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced BLP articles if they are not sourced, so your project may want to source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles that your project covers, to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 05:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for repeating myself but we are actually ahead of most Wikiprojects in that we already know all of the articles that fall under this project that are unreferenced BLPs, Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Unreferenced BLPs. If they remain unreferenced they will be deleted within the coming months. Admittedly many of them are of questionable notability but there are many that are clearly notable and easily referenced, Carlos Cavazo is the most obvious example and Geezer Butler was sourced just a few hours before the list was run. If everyone who recently signed Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Active Users sourced (and cleaned up!) just 2-3 articles a day we can have the list polished off in a couple of weeks. J04n(talk page) 20:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Geezer Butler?! That's crazy. I have taken a look at some in the list, and prodded one. I'll see what is left that is notable that I can work on. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 20:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
A lot of these are prod/redirect material, as I'm going through everything. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 20:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Album reviews

According to WP:Album:

Professional reviews should no longer be included in the infobox, but be described in paragraph form in a "Reception" section.

The "Reception" section goes into more detail about how this should be handled.

I have not actually noticed any metal albums that have them removed from the infobox. Should we just start going through metal albums, and changing them to this new format? H2ostra (talk) 08:49, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The first 3 Black Sabbath albums (Black Sabbath (album), Paranoid (album), and Master of Reality) have been updated to reflect this. My intention is to finish the Sabbath albums then move on but I keep getting side-tracked. A list of all of the pages that have been converted is here scanning it quickly I see that Metallica and Led Zeppelin albums have been converted. There is a bot set up to help the process but I'm not sure what the status is. The relevant discussions are all at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums for anyone that's interested. J04n(talk page) 10:40, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

For those who speak it...

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Non-ISO Languages#en-dm (Death metal). TheWeakWilled (T * G) 14:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

LOL, very good. J04n(talk page) 16:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Sweet. I'll add one of those to my userpage right now. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 20:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Andreas Hedlund in need of sourcing and copyediting

In attempting to clear the list of metal-related unreferenced BLPs I came across Andreas Hedlund. My impression is that this page is one of the most notable articles on the list. I could easily source it so it would no longer be 'unreferenced' but if someone wants to put the time and energy in I think it could be a really good article. So if any of you are into the Swedish metal scene, or if you want to learn more about it this is an article that would greatly benefit from some attention. Thanks J04n(talk page) 15:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on the article Roots (Sepultura album)

A user has been edit-warring on the article Roots (Sepultura album), against the sources listed on the article's talk page, and consensus for a single genre. Please comment on this issue. (Sugar Bear (talk) 21:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC))

Bot which automatically updates unreferenced biography of living persons daily

RE: Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 34#Unreferenced biography of living persons bot to get projects involved in referencing.

Hello wikiproject, I requested a bot which will update unreferenced living people (BLPs) daily. User talk:Betacommand is willing to create this bot. Since you already have a /Unreferenced BLPs page, this shows your project really cares about this issue.

I just need a list of projects who would like to test this bot. Please let me know here if your project would like to do this. Thank you. Okip (the new and improved Ikip) 19:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI, [1] Jo4n for said it is okay to test this bot on /Unreferenced BLPs. Okip (the new and improved Ikip) 11:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

List of unreferenced BLPs with google news, scholar, books and first paragraph of article

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Metal/Unreferenced BLPs

Okip (formerly Ikip) 06:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, real metal heads wanted for deletion discussion.

Two entries I started have been targeted for deletion, and I would appreciate people familiar with punk and metal to join the discussion so that it conforms with the relevant projects. Thanks. These are the entries:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lesser of Two

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embers (band) noodle 02:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noodlesteve (talk • contribs)

GA reassessment of Jeff Hanneman

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:Jeff Hanneman/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:21, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eyes of the Oracle

The articles Eyes of the Oracle and Rooms of Anguish are up for deletion (see discussion link above). They are both albums by the band Power of Omens, of whom had their article removed a while back. I created both the articles up for deletion. Feel free to put your discussion there. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 04:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Fever

Fever, the new album from Bullet for My Valentine, has been nominated for deletion. The link in the album's article to the deletion discussion recently sent to an incorrect page, so I have corrected this, and thought I would post the correct one here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fever (Bullet for My Valentine album). Do the right thing. --SteelersFanUK06 HereWeGo2010! 01:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Concerning Metal Genre Titles

I think Wikipedia needs an overhall in what is considered to be a metal band and genre naming in general. I don't think what is popularly named metal, should be a valid reason to call something metal, because it isn't a factual analysis of the bands actual genre. Music genres like art movements themselves, should be determined by the artists themselves and not by the media and corperations that produce the material. If something is a fusion of genres, such as hardcore and death metal, it should be named deathcore and nothing else, because naming them death metal is defaming the genre. It distorts the genres true origins and credit is taken away from the bands who invented and pioneered the genre.

The first band I think need to be changed is Iwrestledabearonce. there songs have nothing in common with how metal is traditionally structured and have more in common with the mathcore genre and other bands like the Dillinger Escape Plan etc. their image and overall sound demeans the genre in various different ways, increasingly narrowing the opinion of metal music as a whole. Aswell as this band, I think all bands that are influenced by hardcore, should only be named as deathcore or metalcore to stop people's confusion and so credit is given where credit is do.

These are basically my thoughts on false genre naming and how it can be tackled and rectified. I hope somebody out there heeds these words and allows people to correctly edit and rename the offending genres.

Thankyou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.47.67 (talk) 17:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your input, but I respectfully disagree in some points. For instance, deathcore is the combination of death metal and metalcore, and not necessarily death metal and hardcore. If a band is a deathmetal/hardcore band doesn't necessarily mean that they are a deathcore band. As for that iwrestleadabearonce conflict going on, I am welcome to something else being added if it is sourced. Another user first decided it, and I kind of just followed suit. I myself don't really think that "avant-garde metal" doesn't entirely fit the genre description of the band. Also, how would it be offending to the genres? I do agree that the genre fields have to be accurate. Also, about the thing where "the artists themselves should decide the genres", I hear that Korn adamantly denies being a nu metal band, although they are widely accepted as such. I'm not so certain that that philosophy will catch on here. Something that you may find interesting is this essay on genre warriors. That should give you some insight on how wikipedia views genre patrolling. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 22:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The Beautiful People (Marilyn Manson song) reassessed for GA SWEEPS

This article has just has its GA status reassessed as part of the WP:SWEEPS; the article was found to have substantial problems, especially in the matter of referencing and Lead layout. Given the substantial nature of these deficiencies, the article has been failed immediately as it is felt that the necessary improvements required to meet the GA criteria will not be made within a 7-day grace period. However, as there has been some (minor) activity on this article recently, and because it is listed under 3 WikiProjects, if the issues outlined in the reassessment are addressed and resolved within 7 days, I will undertake an immediate GA review to re-list the article. The reassessment review can be found here. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any queries regarding this matter. ✽ Juniper§ Liege (TALK) 22:51, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

FAC

Can somebody please review Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Killswitch Engage/archive2. I have received little criticism on it. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 15:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Mudvayne

Could someone comment on an issue over at Talk:Mudvayne/Archive 1#Request for comment? Thanks. (Sugar Bear (talk) 21:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC))

Request for Review/Reassessment

I recently did a lot of work to Danish Heavy Metal band, Volbeat's page. I was wondering if you can maybe post some info up on the discussion page and to reassess the article's rating of stub. Also, if you have heard of the band at all help out with adding any info you can find. Thanks. --Volbeatfan (talk) 15:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Started a bunch of AFD's

Discovered the category for music genre stubs and have started picking through it. I have nominated a bunch of articles. They all pretty much fall into The category of neologisms, stuff that so new there are no real sources. Stuff that's an OR blend of other stuff. Stuff that might almost kind of be a real genre but the differences is so small that it really should be part of a parent article.

You will notice most of them are dance music. I assure everyone this not because of any prejudice, it is simply because there is a huge number of poorly defined sub genres of dance music. Hopefully we can get this cleaned up, things deleted, things merrged things expanded and sourced if they can be. I welcome all input. Ridernyc (talk) 07:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed Splits of List of Black and List of Death Metal Bands

List of black metal bands and List of death metal bands. Thanks to the sources. Both articles exceed 100KB, violating WP:TOOLONG, and it does have an effect. These pages do take me awhile to load up, and I wouldn't be surprised if anyone else is having the same issue. Anyways, I would like to suggest two options:

One would be to split these articles into two or three different articles.

Or we just remove the sources on the articles altogether. I just don't see what the sense is to include the sources on the page if it is sourced on the band's respective Wikipedia page.--F-22 RaptörAces High♠ 21:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Expanding on the splits of these articles, would it be a good idea to divide the pages up into certain subgenres of black metal and death metal, maybe such as black/death metal, technical death metal, symphonic black metal, et cetera? That's a suggestion that came to me. I don't think the removal of the references would be necessary. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 22:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
The thing about splitting them up by genres is that it can be too subjective. Maybe it's best played safer with splitting them into a certain alphabetical range.--F-22 RaptörAces High♠ 22:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
I can agree with that reasoning. And dividing it into alphabetic ranges is a pretty good idea that will seemingly have no reasonable doubt over which band goes where. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 22:37, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Back in the black metal article, FireCrystal was in agreement too. Any objections before I or someone else make these splits?--F-22 RaptörAces High♠ 00:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I forgot one more hurdle. The articles in other languages. How do we deal with that situation among a split? I have absolutely no experience with cross-country editing.--F-22 RaptörAces High♠ 23:11, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Christian Metal

I invite everyone here to come and comment on whether or not a list of Christian metal radio shows should be a part of the article. [2]. Ridernyc (talk) 22:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

We're Here Because We're Here and Horizons (Anathema album)

Something happened where the article information was passed from Horizons (Anathema album) to We're Here Because We're Here without moving it officially. Someone copied and pasted the information from the Horizons page to the WHBWH page. The Horizons page is now a redirect to the other page. Can somebody do the thing where the history from th redirected page is merged with the history of the new page? And if I encounter this in the future, can I be taught how to merge those histories, or is it just an administrator's job (needless to say, I'm not an administrator). One more inquiry: is there a specific place where I send such complaints like this one? I have dealt with stuff like this in the past, the first time being me learning the hard way that maneuvers like this aren't permitted on wikipedia. Thank you in advance. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 21:53, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

The ability to delete and restore pages is necessary for a history merge (see WP:CUTPASTE for more). The easiest way to request a merge is to use {{db-histmerge}}. Thanks for noticing this one. It is now done. Prolog (talk) 22:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
No problem, and thanks for fixing the situation. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 23:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Featured article review of Megadeth

I wanted to let you know I have nominated the Megadeth article for FA review, as it appears to depreciated since it was promoted to featured article. I believe that it does not pass several of the FA criteria (specifically 1(a), 1(c), 2(a), 3, and 4). Since this article is vital to your project, I wanted to inform you of this so that you are aware of the review and can improve the article. Let me know if you have any concerns. Thanks. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 21:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Demo 98/99

There is a deletion discussion going on about the aforementioned demo by the band Vaakevandring. Some commentary would be nice; thanks. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 22:12, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on List of nu metal bands

Discussion can be found over at Talk:List of nu metal bands#Disputed. The disagreement is over whether bands formerly included with the list that have multiple citations stating that they do not belong to the genre, or not enough citations stating that they belong to the genre, and whether or not such bands should stay. Particularly controversial was the inclusion of Tool. (Sugar Bear (talk) 19:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC))

Category:Grindcore groups → Category:Grindcore musical groups

You know how a lot of the band sorting by genre categories are phrased "________ musical groups"? The category of Category:Grindcore groups is something of a deviation from that rule. I can't move it myself because the move tab isn't in the mainspace, but can this category be moved to "Category:Grindcore musical groups" for the sake of consistency? Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 02:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Jon Mikl Thor

I'm not familiar with format/ref parameters on music articles; anyone here wanna clean Thor's article up?Skookum1 (talk) 14:55, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Wykked Wytch

Your comments would be greatly appreciated at an Afd for a black metal band here. Neelix (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Notification regarding Wikipedia-Books

Hadronic Matter
An overview
An example of a book cover, taken from Book:Hadronic Matter

As detailed in last week's Signpost, WildBot has been patrolling Wikipedia-Books and searched for various problems in them, such as books having duplicate articles or containing redirects. WikiProject Wikipedia-Books is in the process of cleaning them up, but help would be appreciated. For this project, the following books have problems:

The problem reports explain in details what exactly are the problems, why they are problems, and how to fix them. This way anyone can fix them even if they aren't familiar with books. If you don't see something that looks like this, then all problems have been fixed. (Please strike articles from this list as the problems get fixed.)

Also, the {{saved book}} template has been updated to allow editors to specify the default covers of books (title, subtitle, cover-image, cover-color), and gives are preview of the default cover on the book's page. An example of such a cover is found on the right. Ideally, all books in Category:Book-Class Heavy Metal articles should have covers.

If you need help with cleaning up a book, help with the {{saved book}} template, or have any questions about books in general, see Help:Books, Wikipedia:Books, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, or ask me on my talk page. Also feel free to join WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as we need all the help we can get.

This message was delivered by User:EarwigBot, at 22:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC), on behalf of Headbomb. Headbomb probably isn't watching this page, so if you want him to reply here, just leave him a message on his talk page. EarwigBot (owner • talk) 22:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)