Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christian music/Sources

Creation

This article was created after a lengthy discussion at WP:Christian music.HotHat (talk) 07:41, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Excellent job with this, HotHat. You've got almost all RSes on the topic I can think of here! The only suggestion I would add would be UPTV.com - formerly Gospel Music Channel.com. They haven't reviewed as much material lately, but given that is a major television channel in the CCM industry, it might be worth adding. Toa Nidhiki05 15:13, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I'll add that. Might I also suggest retitling this page as simply "Sources", so as not to limit it just to reviews?--¿3family6 _contribs 16:12, 13 July 2013 (UTC) Never mind that second part. I'm assuming this list will merge with Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Sources?--¿3family6 _contribs 16:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Sources is of a higher quality than just music review sources, so we have to be very careful if we are going to merge. I like having them be two standalone articles, but that is just me.HotHat (talk) 06:06, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Either a source is reliable or it isn't. I do agree that a lot of work was done on the "Sources" page, but a lot of work was done here as well.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I mentioned this on the main project discussion, but I'll restate here with further comments: Gospel music needs inclusion as a category. For that matter, R&B and urban, classical, jazz, country, and electronic should also be considered. For publications like Cross Rhythms and Christianity Today which deal with every style, a simple "all" should suffice.--¿3family6 _contribs 16:30, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

• We have a tremendous ammount of resources to use now, so I except more higher quality articles pertaining to this genre of music, such as albums, songs, biographies/band/artist pages. Furthermore, I think critical reception sections should be a cinch.HotHat (talk) 03:22, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Wade-O Radio

I think we should include this source: Wade-O Radio It is the home site for DJ Wade-O's internet radio programs.--¿3family6 _contribs 12:17, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I do think we should include it, but only under self published sources.HotHat (talk) 23:53, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Got it on the list.HotHat (talk) 00:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Why under self-published? He has a full staff.--¿3family6 _contribs 00:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I should have clarified in my initial post that while it is DJ Wade-O's site, he has a full staff team, and much, if not most, of the writing is not by him.--¿3family6 _contribs 00:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I will correct the article.HotHat (talk) 02:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Expand to include charts?

I think a good idea here would be, if there were a consensus for it, to expand to include which singles charts are acceptable. CCM is rather unique in that it has had three major singles charts over a relatively short timespan, meaning it might be confusing to some editors. I propose including the following, with disclaimers:

• CCM Magazine charts - Chart histories are not available online; they are only available in individual magazines and the out-of-print Hot Hits books by Jeffery Lee Brothers. CCM charts were monthly from July 1978 to September 1986, bi-weekly from September 1986 to June 1992, and weekly from June 1992 to April 15, 2002, when the charts and data were turned over to Radio and Records. CCM Magazine is reliable for pre-Radio & Records charts, and was the only magazine to publish CCM charts from 1978 to 2002.
• Radio & Records charts - Chart histories are not directly accessible online, but many chart weeks can be found in web archives such as the Wayback Machine. R&R charts were weekly, and were published from April 15, 2005 until June 2009, when the magazine was shuttered. R&R charts are reliable and a good accompaniment for the Billboard charts, especially in regards to the Christian CHR, INSPO, and Christian Rock formats, which Billboard did not cover.
• Billboard charts - Chart histories are available online. Billboard began covering CCM singles with the creation of the Christian Songs and Hot Christian AC charts on June 21, 2003. After the shuttering of R&R in 2009, Billboard took over publication of the Christian CHR, INSPO, and Christian rock charts.

It might be worth it to note which members own the Hot Hits books, so users can find the information quicker; I own the Adult Contemporary charts book, but not the CHR book. Toa Nidhiki05 00:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

In the UK, it is Cross Rhythms.HotHat (talk) 00:20, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

In Australia, it is The Rock Across Australia (TRAA).HotHat (talk) 00:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Very nice work - feel free to add those to the article.--¿3family6 _contribs 00:39, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The Sound Opinion

This is most certainly reliable because of its contributors are some of the best in the business.HotHat (talk) 02:06, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

If there is editorial oversight for what each contributor writes, then it certainly is passable. If not, then the authors qualify as self-published sources. They do have some impeccable credentials.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:29, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The Sound Opinion has as its editor Lindsay Williams The Sound Opinion, and at YouTube.HotHat (talk) 07:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Name change

I propose the name to be changed to Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Music charting and review sources. What do you all think about that?HotHat (talk) 02:15, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I still think it should be merged with the Sources article. Many of the entries are duplicates, making these pages prime targets for merging. Sources are either reliable or they aren't.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I will work on that, but I think we could merge this to Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Sources (current), for this list, and put the other at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Sources (archived). This is so that we can keep the other links to sources because that kind of information should not ever be lost. I like the disambiguation better because it solves the titling issues.HotHat (talk) 06:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Furthermore, I propose making Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Sources a link page for both the current/new/updated and for the archived/old/outdated. What do you think? I just don't want to lose the work of the previous undertakings.HotHat (talk) 07:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

An archive is precisely what I had in mind. Archive all of the reference documentation, and then put in a link to the effect of "to see previous research demonstrating reliability" (hopefully better worded than that).--¿3family6 _contribs 12:06, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Archive of old source research

An older version of this page included research for many of the sources listed. If anyone wishes to view this research, they can do so here.--¿3family6 _contribs 19:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Where to put this website

CMNexus is a great resource - you can search an artist and find print and online reviews for their albums, as well as won awards and news articles. Where should this go on this page? Toa Nidhiki05 13:38, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

I'd probably include it under "Online only", with a note explaining that it's a reference list.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:53, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Recommendation for adding new source

Hi, there! I am in the process of revising all the early album entries for the Choir, adding relevant information with reliable sources and doing basic formatting and cleanup. I've gotten as far as Diamonds and Rain and am currently working on completely revamping Chase the Kangaroo. However, in adding reviews to the band's later works, I've discovered that writer Brian Q. Newcomb, who founded Harvest Rock Syndicate and has written for other Christian music publications for decades, is a contributor to the music site The Fire Note. I recommend that be considered a reliable source for reviews, as he has long-standing credentials in Christian music journalism. TARDIS (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

No one seems to have noticed this until now. Yeah, that sounds fine, TARDIS.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I actually have completed all the band's album entries. Sad news, though... Newcomb passed away earlier this year. TARDIS (talk) 00:01, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

That's disappointing.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:52, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Adding Angelic Warlord as a source

Angelic Warlord has both an editorial staff and is discussed in Marcus Moberg's Christian Metal: History, Ideology, Scene and Heidi Rademacher's "Men of iron will':Idealized gender in Christian heavy metal", the latter of which calls it (on page 637) "a trusted and established internet resource for Christian metal reviews, links, discographies, interviews, and news". 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:08, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Adding The Metal Resource as a source

The Metal Resource has a writing staff and is mentioned by Angelic Warlord as a site similar to it. HM interviewed the site master regarding his band and they discuss the site. The festival is also mentioned in an interview by a reliable online magazine. 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:21, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

The fact that as of recent days, just one person is curating/gate keeping means that this list is more or less the same as a blog/website. Graywalls (talk) 07:34, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Do you want to join this project? I'll welcome the help. Sources don't always need discussion to be used, but because I thought these might be challenged, I brought them to the talk here first and stated the rationale for inclusion.

Your comparison isn't really comparable. All WikiProject source lists are user-generated and themselves aren't reliable. They represent community consensus. If you mean that this list no longer represents a consensus, that's only perhaps true for a couple of sources, as the rest where discussed and overseen by multiple editors. And even one person can be a consensus. Do you disagree with my assessment of these two particular sources?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 11:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

See WP:CONLEVEL. The narrower and more specialized a Wikiproject is, the more local such community consensus is. I take those local consensus with a grain of salt. A consensus within that group that certain sources are usable for notability doesn't mean there's consensus certain sources can be used to establish notability for justifying having an article on Wikipedia. RS/N is the designated place for discussing sources on Wiki. It's the repeated discussion here that led to FORBES and Huffington Post CONTRIBUTOR articles as essentially unusable at WP:RSP, the place where broader consensus about repeatedly discussed sources is scribed. Graywalls (talk) 16:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Again, do you disagree with my assessment of these two particular sources?

Your approach here isn't entirely correct. Yes, CONLEVEL is correct. However, you are incorrect in two areas: 1) sources don't have to be exhaustively vetted to be used. One can use them and if an editor challenges that usage, an avenue like RS/N is where consensus can be reached over a disputed source. 2) RS/N isn't the exclusive avenue to pursue those questions. For instance, Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums has long been the primary outlet for discussing sources. Indeed, I believe you were referred to there and WikiProject Music by two editors at RS/N in this discussion, where they said you should try those more local projects first, precisely because of the difficulty of establishing some of these sources as reliable.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:30, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Curation

I just updated the list. I updated the status of online sources, added archived urls for defunct online links, added and updated information about site operators and head editors, added a note about how site operators and editors are effectively self-published sources, and removed a couple defunct sites that were of questionable reliability anyway.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 23:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)