![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I was wanting to know if i can add album reviews from professional sites, even on albums that are already described. I would really want to do that. Tannersf 00:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking more on the lines of a word review, not a rating. Tannersf 01:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Once again, someone has nominated Church of Misery for deletion here, even after I noted the notability guidelines on its talk page. Can we please take some steps to keep this article?
Also thanks to User:Prolog for the good words on the Afd. -- Eastlaw 06:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Holy crap he has such a tiny article plz make it bigger for metal's sake!! Mighty Zeus 04:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I have been updating and cleaning up the article for Australian gothic metal band The Eternal with new information and to make it more relevant. It has been changed back twice saying that it was 'not helping the article' which i beg to differ as the article starts in the middle of nowhere and is out of date. Any help? Blackserenity 04:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Category:2000's Retro Metal movement, what the hell is this category for & about? Diabolical 09:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Category:American heavy metal musical groups This category has a few subcategories - Dark Angel (band), Louisiania heavy metal and Maryland heavy metal. I created the MD one and added it but it seems we should either split this up by state or not split it up at all. I feel the cat is pretty long and would be very long and not very useful if we put all American HM bands in. Splitting up by State seems that it would be much more useful. Any thoughts? Olliegrind 18:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I just did an inactive sweep to see how much members we actually have. Members with no edits in the last 3 months(or decent amount) were moved onto the "inactive list". Half the peoples last edits were signing up to this project :|. M3tal H3ad 05:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
The article about Meta-Metal has been created today. There is only one article that links to this page and I couldn't find any mention of it neither at Heavy metal music nor at List of heavy metal genres. Is there really such a sub-genre of heavy metal? Jogers ( talk) 13:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I prodded it as well. Ours18 20:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
If anyone is a singer in a metal band, they can use the userbox {{User Metal Singer}} which looks like this:
![]() | This user growls in a heavy metal band. |
![]() |
. Asics talk Editor review! 18:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
What about people who sing in bands who don't use harsh vocals? Inhumer 22:17, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I was going to ask the same question. I am a singer but I don't always growl. Zouavman Le Zouave ( Talk to me! • O)))) 11:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I suppose you could say that is the common image of Metal. It certainly depends on the singer, and the style of Metal, as was said earlier. I encourage the original creator of the template to make an alternative to those who don't, "Growl". Megazodiac 15:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Make an alternative, and change that to death metal, possibly. Doppelganger E 02:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Should we extend the scope of this project to the ambient / acoustic / neofolk bands like Nest? It is listed on The Metal Archives. Óðinn 09:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd say that's questionable, though I understand the purpose and agree with it to some extent. I think it would be best if all nonmetal side-projects of metal bands were included in this project, rather than bands who share similar ideals and are well liked by metal listeners. IE, Lustmord should not be included simply because a substantial number of his fanbase if made up of black metal fans.
The side-project thing is tricky though, because some nonmetal bands have metal sideprojects, and therw would probably be an outcry if people found out that a member of Sum41 was included in WikiProject Metal. We'd have to have some pretty strict rules. Ours18 23:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Michael Norkus 02:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
|
I have just created the Megadeth Wikiproject. But I think that the scope is too narrow (just Megadeth) and I think that the Metal Genre WikiProject is too large of a scope to handle everything. I propose that we make a WikiPrjoect Big Four, or something to that effect to cover the Big Four American Metal bands, Metallica, Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax. I'm eager to hear any opinions. Adumbvoget 08:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
On an unrelated note, who's the main instigators in this Project, as I'm keen to know. Thus far, most expanded band / musician / album articles have been avoid of citations and structure, and would only be Start class at best. What plans and actions have there been to address this? What solid efforts are there so that more Metal related articles become GA / FA? It just seems that so far the Project has failed to have any direction, or to make any impact. LuciferMorgan 18:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Would the articles Korn and Lordi fall more under the scope of WikiProject Metal than the Rock music WikiProject? -- Reaper X 15:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Alright, cool. We'll take Korn, but as for Lordi? I wouldn't know, never heard them. -- Reaper X 21:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. -- Reaper X 16:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Apparently, as you can see from the discussion page for the article, MA fails a number of criteria for WP:EL. His reasoning is faulty on multiple accounts, and anyone who knows his editing history knows he hates any website that contradicts him. The arguments about "Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research" and "based on verifiable research from printed works, its just a "I like this, I don't like that" non professionally run site" are particularly flimsy, but alas I am positive he won't consider any arguments from me valid, as is his way. If anyone else cares to step in, you may do so at your own risk...whenever deathrocker is involved it never ends.
I'll reply to his non-arguments if no one else does so within three days, although I will be out of town on business starting tomorrow...I'll do my best to keep track of any harmful edits to the article. Ours18 03:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
As Ours stated, he hate anything that contradicts what he thinks. Inhumer 03:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I still don't understand how he hasn't been totally banned yet. Inhumer 20:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
1. Discographies are on official band websites. 2. Users can submit crap they want.
I'm not saying its a reliable source, I'm just questioning his reasons. Inhumer 02:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
First off, I want to thank you Lucifer (hur hur) for being reasonable and civil in your point; a certain other editor's lack of civility is the reason why I didn't bother responding to his points on the Heavy Metal talkpage.
However, I must dispute the supposed lack of reliability of Encyclopaedia Metallum. You say that users can submit any crap they want; this is only somewhat true. I have been using and adding info to that site for over a year now and I still can't edit certain parts of a band's or album's page. I cannot, for example, edit the "Additional Notes" section of a band page, or the corresponding (unlabeled) section for an album page. If I wanted to add whatever crap I wanted there, I would have to click "report a mistake on this page" and someone else---a mod or admin---would have to approve it. I'm not a mod there so I couldn't tell you with certainty, but I think that is a very effective defense against the "HEY LETS SUBMIT INFORMATION CALLING THE BAND A BUNCH OF STUPID RAPPERS HUR HUR" syndrome that seems to plague all other user-submitted info sites.
Speaking of banning, that is the most crucial thing there: if you get banned YOU GET BANNED. They don't dodge around the issue by giving the internet equivalent of a time-out like the admins do here---no 24-hour bans, no 48-hour bans. If you are banned it is permanent, which means no one adds useless crap and then gets to do it again (the primary reason Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source by most academic types). Sources are provided at the bottom of a band's page.
Lastly, this isn't really an argument against yours as I realize this is official policy, but by Uncle Wiki's own logic, if sources that have user-submitted info are considered unreliable, that means Wikipedia is condemning itself as unreliable---essentially calling itself worthless. Doesn't this mean Uncle Wiki is a walking contradiction? Ours18 19:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Recently the Project has implemented an assessment scheme to asess the quality of its articles, of which more can be explained at our assessment page. An understanding of our page should help you in understanding what this entails.
The problem at the moment is that most articles are unassessed; your assistance as a Project member in addressing this is humbly requested. Unassessed articles can be found at Category:Unassessed Heavy Metal articles.
Another problem is that most articles within the scope of the Project remain without the {{ HMM}} tag. In this I mean metal bands, metal musicians and metal albums / songs. If people could add the {{ HMM}} tag to those articles in the scope of the Project and preferably an assesment rating at the same time, this would be great.
Once all this has largely resumed its course, we can then have firm confirmation of where the Project is at. Once we have that, we can then discuss and implement measures to improve the performance of the Project. Thanks for your time. LuciferMorgan 09:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
PS - One major problem of the Project is the focus on creating articles, which needs to be addressed. We need to raise articles from the level of Stubs and get them to B / GA / FA. Please review WP:GA?, WP:FA? and especially WP:CITE and WP:PR to give you tips on article improvisation. LuciferMorgan 09:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Heavy metal music has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 09:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay here it is:
What do you think? Zouavman Le Zouave ( Talk to me! • O)))) 20:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi guys, when a very good "peer review" of this nice article?? When?? --[X-S] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.55.128.111 ( talk) 13:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC).
Okay, we seriously need to come up with a standard for these. Some articles for band members are titled by a person's real name (e.g. Jan Axel Blomberg), whereas others are titled by their pseudonym (e.g. ICS Vortex). There needs to be a standard already, because it's really bothering me, and it makes all the black metal pages harder to keep consistent with wikilinking. = ∫ t c 5th Eye 17:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I was wanting to know if i can add album reviews from professional sites, even on albums that are already described. I would really want to do that. Tannersf 00:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking more on the lines of a word review, not a rating. Tannersf 01:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Once again, someone has nominated Church of Misery for deletion here, even after I noted the notability guidelines on its talk page. Can we please take some steps to keep this article?
Also thanks to User:Prolog for the good words on the Afd. -- Eastlaw 06:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Holy crap he has such a tiny article plz make it bigger for metal's sake!! Mighty Zeus 04:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I have been updating and cleaning up the article for Australian gothic metal band The Eternal with new information and to make it more relevant. It has been changed back twice saying that it was 'not helping the article' which i beg to differ as the article starts in the middle of nowhere and is out of date. Any help? Blackserenity 04:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Category:2000's Retro Metal movement, what the hell is this category for & about? Diabolical 09:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Category:American heavy metal musical groups This category has a few subcategories - Dark Angel (band), Louisiania heavy metal and Maryland heavy metal. I created the MD one and added it but it seems we should either split this up by state or not split it up at all. I feel the cat is pretty long and would be very long and not very useful if we put all American HM bands in. Splitting up by State seems that it would be much more useful. Any thoughts? Olliegrind 18:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I just did an inactive sweep to see how much members we actually have. Members with no edits in the last 3 months(or decent amount) were moved onto the "inactive list". Half the peoples last edits were signing up to this project :|. M3tal H3ad 05:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
The article about Meta-Metal has been created today. There is only one article that links to this page and I couldn't find any mention of it neither at Heavy metal music nor at List of heavy metal genres. Is there really such a sub-genre of heavy metal? Jogers ( talk) 13:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I prodded it as well. Ours18 20:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
If anyone is a singer in a metal band, they can use the userbox {{User Metal Singer}} which looks like this:
![]() | This user growls in a heavy metal band. |
![]() |
. Asics talk Editor review! 18:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
What about people who sing in bands who don't use harsh vocals? Inhumer 22:17, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I was going to ask the same question. I am a singer but I don't always growl. Zouavman Le Zouave ( Talk to me! • O)))) 11:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I suppose you could say that is the common image of Metal. It certainly depends on the singer, and the style of Metal, as was said earlier. I encourage the original creator of the template to make an alternative to those who don't, "Growl". Megazodiac 15:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Make an alternative, and change that to death metal, possibly. Doppelganger E 02:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Should we extend the scope of this project to the ambient / acoustic / neofolk bands like Nest? It is listed on The Metal Archives. Óðinn 09:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd say that's questionable, though I understand the purpose and agree with it to some extent. I think it would be best if all nonmetal side-projects of metal bands were included in this project, rather than bands who share similar ideals and are well liked by metal listeners. IE, Lustmord should not be included simply because a substantial number of his fanbase if made up of black metal fans.
The side-project thing is tricky though, because some nonmetal bands have metal sideprojects, and therw would probably be an outcry if people found out that a member of Sum41 was included in WikiProject Metal. We'd have to have some pretty strict rules. Ours18 23:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Michael Norkus 02:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
|
I have just created the Megadeth Wikiproject. But I think that the scope is too narrow (just Megadeth) and I think that the Metal Genre WikiProject is too large of a scope to handle everything. I propose that we make a WikiPrjoect Big Four, or something to that effect to cover the Big Four American Metal bands, Metallica, Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax. I'm eager to hear any opinions. Adumbvoget 08:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
On an unrelated note, who's the main instigators in this Project, as I'm keen to know. Thus far, most expanded band / musician / album articles have been avoid of citations and structure, and would only be Start class at best. What plans and actions have there been to address this? What solid efforts are there so that more Metal related articles become GA / FA? It just seems that so far the Project has failed to have any direction, or to make any impact. LuciferMorgan 18:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Would the articles Korn and Lordi fall more under the scope of WikiProject Metal than the Rock music WikiProject? -- Reaper X 15:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Alright, cool. We'll take Korn, but as for Lordi? I wouldn't know, never heard them. -- Reaper X 21:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. -- Reaper X 16:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Apparently, as you can see from the discussion page for the article, MA fails a number of criteria for WP:EL. His reasoning is faulty on multiple accounts, and anyone who knows his editing history knows he hates any website that contradicts him. The arguments about "Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research" and "based on verifiable research from printed works, its just a "I like this, I don't like that" non professionally run site" are particularly flimsy, but alas I am positive he won't consider any arguments from me valid, as is his way. If anyone else cares to step in, you may do so at your own risk...whenever deathrocker is involved it never ends.
I'll reply to his non-arguments if no one else does so within three days, although I will be out of town on business starting tomorrow...I'll do my best to keep track of any harmful edits to the article. Ours18 03:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
As Ours stated, he hate anything that contradicts what he thinks. Inhumer 03:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I still don't understand how he hasn't been totally banned yet. Inhumer 20:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
1. Discographies are on official band websites. 2. Users can submit crap they want.
I'm not saying its a reliable source, I'm just questioning his reasons. Inhumer 02:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
First off, I want to thank you Lucifer (hur hur) for being reasonable and civil in your point; a certain other editor's lack of civility is the reason why I didn't bother responding to his points on the Heavy Metal talkpage.
However, I must dispute the supposed lack of reliability of Encyclopaedia Metallum. You say that users can submit any crap they want; this is only somewhat true. I have been using and adding info to that site for over a year now and I still can't edit certain parts of a band's or album's page. I cannot, for example, edit the "Additional Notes" section of a band page, or the corresponding (unlabeled) section for an album page. If I wanted to add whatever crap I wanted there, I would have to click "report a mistake on this page" and someone else---a mod or admin---would have to approve it. I'm not a mod there so I couldn't tell you with certainty, but I think that is a very effective defense against the "HEY LETS SUBMIT INFORMATION CALLING THE BAND A BUNCH OF STUPID RAPPERS HUR HUR" syndrome that seems to plague all other user-submitted info sites.
Speaking of banning, that is the most crucial thing there: if you get banned YOU GET BANNED. They don't dodge around the issue by giving the internet equivalent of a time-out like the admins do here---no 24-hour bans, no 48-hour bans. If you are banned it is permanent, which means no one adds useless crap and then gets to do it again (the primary reason Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source by most academic types). Sources are provided at the bottom of a band's page.
Lastly, this isn't really an argument against yours as I realize this is official policy, but by Uncle Wiki's own logic, if sources that have user-submitted info are considered unreliable, that means Wikipedia is condemning itself as unreliable---essentially calling itself worthless. Doesn't this mean Uncle Wiki is a walking contradiction? Ours18 19:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Recently the Project has implemented an assessment scheme to asess the quality of its articles, of which more can be explained at our assessment page. An understanding of our page should help you in understanding what this entails.
The problem at the moment is that most articles are unassessed; your assistance as a Project member in addressing this is humbly requested. Unassessed articles can be found at Category:Unassessed Heavy Metal articles.
Another problem is that most articles within the scope of the Project remain without the {{ HMM}} tag. In this I mean metal bands, metal musicians and metal albums / songs. If people could add the {{ HMM}} tag to those articles in the scope of the Project and preferably an assesment rating at the same time, this would be great.
Once all this has largely resumed its course, we can then have firm confirmation of where the Project is at. Once we have that, we can then discuss and implement measures to improve the performance of the Project. Thanks for your time. LuciferMorgan 09:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
PS - One major problem of the Project is the focus on creating articles, which needs to be addressed. We need to raise articles from the level of Stubs and get them to B / GA / FA. Please review WP:GA?, WP:FA? and especially WP:CITE and WP:PR to give you tips on article improvisation. LuciferMorgan 09:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Heavy metal music has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 09:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay here it is:
What do you think? Zouavman Le Zouave ( Talk to me! • O)))) 20:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi guys, when a very good "peer review" of this nice article?? When?? --[X-S] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.55.128.111 ( talk) 13:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC).
Okay, we seriously need to come up with a standard for these. Some articles for band members are titled by a person's real name (e.g. Jan Axel Blomberg), whereas others are titled by their pseudonym (e.g. ICS Vortex). There needs to be a standard already, because it's really bothering me, and it makes all the black metal pages harder to keep consistent with wikilinking. = ∫ t c 5th Eye 17:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)