![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The way the "Albums in production" section is currently organized goes against a few Wikipedia guidelines and policies. First of all, by placing albums that have titles ahead of other albums within the same list, this seems to imply there are two groups of information being presented. According to Wikipedia's Manuel of Style for Lists, all lists need to have a clear and consistent way of organization. Also, by placing the upcoming albums with confirmed titles first within an alphabetically sorted list, this seems to imply an order of importance. However, this is not the case. These albums are no more important than the rest of them, and this does not adhere to Wikipedia's Policy on a Neutral Point of View. Fezmar9 ( talk) 03:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
What if the title for the "Albums in production" section was changed to "Artists with albums in production" and all occurrences of TBA were removed from the article? Having TBA next to each artist doesn't really tell the reader anything other than "we don't know what it will be titled." But why is that important? Wouldn't the lack of any title at all say the same thing? Also, I count 260 occurrences of " – TBA" in this article. Since it's still early in the year, this number will increase as more new albums are announced. According to a quick sandbox test edit, only 260 occurrences of " – TBA" equates to +2,000 bytes of information. So removing this minor detail would also help shrink the article, which is already monstrous and likely handicaps anyone with a slow internet connection. Thoughts? Fezmar9 ( talk) 19:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Ant smusher, could please you elaborate on your reasons for claiming "this is not heavy metal news, just slander against a Drowning Pool song (which is quite typical of the media to exploit)"? Your logic here in this edit summary seems to be that something isn't news if it occurs regularly. Or that because the media routinely reports on something, there's no point in mentioning it. Well, the media also routinely reports on bands touring and gaining new members. It's quite typical for the media to promote these ventures. So should all instances of bands touring and gaining new members be dropped from the list as well? That would account for half of the current list. You're also suggesting that all news needs to be directly related to heavy metal. So should the Beatles cover band should be removed as well? A possible connection between this song and Loughner's behavior has been widely publicized with equal amounts of publications defending Drowning Pool, and others dragging their name through the mud. Fezmar9 ( talk) 20:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I understand this edit was made in good faith in an attempt to better the article, but I just do not see the benefit here. Largely because I fail to see a problem worth solving (see also Wikipedia:If it ain't broke, don't fix it). First of all, according to WP:CITE#List-defined references: "As with other citation formats, list-defined references should not be added to articles that already have a stable referencing system, unless there is consensus to do so. When in doubt, follow the referencing system used by the first major contributor to employ a consistent style." If you check at the article's list of contributors, User:Ant smusher is by far the article's major contributor, and this not his style of referencing. Unless this is something Ant smusher would find useful (I'll drop a message on his talk page), no one should be going around to Wikipedia articles and deciding what style of referencing should be used. That's really a decision up to the people who make the majority of the edits.
This article is massive (see also Wikipedia:Article size) and already takes a little bit to load on even the highest of internet speeds. Adding 46,000+ bytes of data, which doesn't result in any noticeable changes to the reader, will only hurt the article by cause longer loading times for slower internet connections (see also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility).
Also, based on what I've seen, IP editors have either conformed to current method of referencing just fine, or not provided a reference at all. I'm not seeing the frightened n00bz you speak of. Fezmar9 ( talk) 22:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
I understand completely that the page is large, and i also don't like the ramping ref list. BUT, if u take that out, then i will have to check EVERY edit on google to see if it legit... Now i have an idea, where we can delete the references after the year is up, so that the page will load better. Because once the year is done, the facts are "set in stone" per-say and the music already released. I just dont see the sense of "saving space" by adding another 55 THOUSAND bits... while the whole object was to reduce size... Now i KNOW u dont save space by adding more, so that's why im undoing these edits.
Ant_smusher (
talk)
08:45, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 2011 in heavy metal music. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=152193{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.dailyheavymetalnews.com/news/2011/01/07/thunderbolt-announces-dung-idols-release-dateWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 13 external links on 2011 in heavy metal music. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=152100{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=153181When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The way the "Albums in production" section is currently organized goes against a few Wikipedia guidelines and policies. First of all, by placing albums that have titles ahead of other albums within the same list, this seems to imply there are two groups of information being presented. According to Wikipedia's Manuel of Style for Lists, all lists need to have a clear and consistent way of organization. Also, by placing the upcoming albums with confirmed titles first within an alphabetically sorted list, this seems to imply an order of importance. However, this is not the case. These albums are no more important than the rest of them, and this does not adhere to Wikipedia's Policy on a Neutral Point of View. Fezmar9 ( talk) 03:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
What if the title for the "Albums in production" section was changed to "Artists with albums in production" and all occurrences of TBA were removed from the article? Having TBA next to each artist doesn't really tell the reader anything other than "we don't know what it will be titled." But why is that important? Wouldn't the lack of any title at all say the same thing? Also, I count 260 occurrences of " – TBA" in this article. Since it's still early in the year, this number will increase as more new albums are announced. According to a quick sandbox test edit, only 260 occurrences of " – TBA" equates to +2,000 bytes of information. So removing this minor detail would also help shrink the article, which is already monstrous and likely handicaps anyone with a slow internet connection. Thoughts? Fezmar9 ( talk) 19:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Ant smusher, could please you elaborate on your reasons for claiming "this is not heavy metal news, just slander against a Drowning Pool song (which is quite typical of the media to exploit)"? Your logic here in this edit summary seems to be that something isn't news if it occurs regularly. Or that because the media routinely reports on something, there's no point in mentioning it. Well, the media also routinely reports on bands touring and gaining new members. It's quite typical for the media to promote these ventures. So should all instances of bands touring and gaining new members be dropped from the list as well? That would account for half of the current list. You're also suggesting that all news needs to be directly related to heavy metal. So should the Beatles cover band should be removed as well? A possible connection between this song and Loughner's behavior has been widely publicized with equal amounts of publications defending Drowning Pool, and others dragging their name through the mud. Fezmar9 ( talk) 20:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I understand this edit was made in good faith in an attempt to better the article, but I just do not see the benefit here. Largely because I fail to see a problem worth solving (see also Wikipedia:If it ain't broke, don't fix it). First of all, according to WP:CITE#List-defined references: "As with other citation formats, list-defined references should not be added to articles that already have a stable referencing system, unless there is consensus to do so. When in doubt, follow the referencing system used by the first major contributor to employ a consistent style." If you check at the article's list of contributors, User:Ant smusher is by far the article's major contributor, and this not his style of referencing. Unless this is something Ant smusher would find useful (I'll drop a message on his talk page), no one should be going around to Wikipedia articles and deciding what style of referencing should be used. That's really a decision up to the people who make the majority of the edits.
This article is massive (see also Wikipedia:Article size) and already takes a little bit to load on even the highest of internet speeds. Adding 46,000+ bytes of data, which doesn't result in any noticeable changes to the reader, will only hurt the article by cause longer loading times for slower internet connections (see also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility).
Also, based on what I've seen, IP editors have either conformed to current method of referencing just fine, or not provided a reference at all. I'm not seeing the frightened n00bz you speak of. Fezmar9 ( talk) 22:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
I understand completely that the page is large, and i also don't like the ramping ref list. BUT, if u take that out, then i will have to check EVERY edit on google to see if it legit... Now i have an idea, where we can delete the references after the year is up, so that the page will load better. Because once the year is done, the facts are "set in stone" per-say and the music already released. I just dont see the sense of "saving space" by adding another 55 THOUSAND bits... while the whole object was to reduce size... Now i KNOW u dont save space by adding more, so that's why im undoing these edits.
Ant_smusher (
talk)
08:45, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 2011 in heavy metal music. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=152193{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.dailyheavymetalnews.com/news/2011/01/07/thunderbolt-announces-dung-idols-release-dateWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 13 external links on 2011 in heavy metal music. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=152100{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=153181When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)