Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alternative music/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Discrepancy between project description and article

This project describes itself as for those interested in "alternative rock and indie rock, as well as other forms of alternative music." The article alternative rock starts "Alternative rock (also called alternative music, alt-rock or simply alternative)". Thus the article describes alt rock as equal to alternative music whereas the project describes alt-rock as a subset of alternative music. How did this discrepancy arise and how is it to be resolved? Munci (talk) 15:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I kinda brought this up once before. I'd say, for accuracy purposes, we should rename this to WikiProject Alternative rock, but since this has been historically named otherwise, we could just stick with that. Remember this is just a Wikiproject name, and not that important.—indopug (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

A simple alternative, I would have thought, would be reword the lede of this project to say "alternative rock, also known as alternative music, as well as indie rock." Munci (talk) 17:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

The reason it's called "WikiProject Alternative music" was to create consistency with the other music projects. It's definitely more intuitive for people when the word "music" is in the title. WesleyDodds (talk) 18:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

In that case, a)see above for possible lede change or b) call it "alternative rock music". Munci (talk) 21:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

As Indopug explained, it's not that big a deal. The project name makes it easy to understand what we're about, while the project description gives more detailed specifics. The lead isn't describing alt-rock as a subset of alternative music; it's simply avoid being overly redundant by using a synonym in the same sentence. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:59, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

It is treating alt-rock as a subset of alternative music. Just reading "alternative rock and indie rock, as well as other forms of alternative music." gives the impression that alternative rock, indie rock and more forms of music besides are subsets of alternative music. It's not avoiding being redundant at all; if it would be doing that it would only mention one of the synonyms thus "alternative rock and indie rock". Munci (talk) 11:56, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

The original idea behind the sentence was that alternative and indie rock are the broadest forms of alt-rock, and "other forms of alternative music" refers to more specific subgenres (ie. Britpop, shoegaze, goth, post-rock, etc.). The redundancy I wanted to avoid was writing ""alternative rock and indie rock, as well as other forms of alternative rock". WesleyDodds (talk) 13:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

In that case, how about "alternative rock, including all its subgenres e.g. indie rock"? Munci (talk) 19:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I rephrased the sentence a few hours ago. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:21, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Cool thanks. :) Munci (talk) 11:15, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

RHCP

Can I get a couple more editors to watchlist Mother's Milk and Blood Sugar Sex Magik? They are featured articles and I'm afraid the quality is degrading since NSR77 (talk · contribs) is inactive. Among the issues is "Genre-adding guy" coming around a few times a week (you all are quite familiar with genre-adding guy, I'm sure).

Yeah WesleyDodds and I cleaned up a few RHCP featured articles a few days back. If IPs are causing problems, why not protect the articles?—indopug (talk) 15:52, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I mainly keep an eye on John Frusciante, Under the Bridge, and Give It Away (Red Hot Chili Peppers song). I check in on Blood Sugar Sex Magik every once in a while. In regards to the other RHCP pages NSR77 used to keep an eye on, I'd say probably the biggest priority is Flea (musician). I haven't looked at it in a while, and it may necessitate some reverting to my last version. WesleyDodds (talk) 18:52, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Hoo boy, I think Flea is in bad shape. There have been months of people wandering by and adding unsourced stuff. Well thanks for the help guys. Indopug, protection policy doesn't really support random IP annoyances—it would have to be pretty heavy vandalism. --Andy Walsh (talk) 20:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Well I give up on the genres. Multiple times a day some IP adds or removes genres from the pages. They have now started adding allmusic.com and discogs as sources for the genres, which I personally don't consider reliable but there doesn't seem to be consensus on the matter anywhere I look. I guess the genres are just doomed to be this way. I don't know how you guys handle dealing with these people on a daily basis. --Andy Walsh (talk) 20:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Might page protection be an option? WesleyDodds (talk) 11:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Maybe. I wouldn't protect it myself because I've been involved. If you guys think there is consensus for semi-protection for a while, feel free. On a side note, I'm thinking about putting some work into Candlebox. It's in pretty bad shape for a band that was so popular. --Andy Walsh (talk) 13:13, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

RFC regarding use of succession boxes in song and album articles

I'm sure you've seen them, succession boxes placed on song and album articles for those that reached number one on music charts. An RFC is taking place at WT:CHARTS#Request for comment: Use of succession boxes to discuss the merits and to come up with some kind of policy regarding their use. Interested parties are encouraged to participate. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 10:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Luv Your Life

The article Luv Your Life has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Single songs generally do not meet the requirements of WP:N, no mention of notability no references

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 23:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Band's that should be under this WikiProject

I have noticed that many alternative bands are not under this WikiProject. Good examples are: Joy Division (I know that technically they were a pre-alternative Post-punk band, but Post-punk has been retroactively labeled as alternative [and I've heard them on an alternative radio station] and their influence on alternative bands is enormous), Nickelback (yes, I hate them to), All-American Rejects, etc. I propose that they be placed under our WikiProject. And about the post-punk thing, I propose that all post-punk and new wave articles be placed under this WikiProject since they have both been labeled retroactively "alternative." Thanks. Sbrianhicks (talk) 18:56, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Post-punk and New Wave bands have never been retroactively labelled "alternative" by reliable sources.—indopug (talk) 03:33, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

The American music industry has frequently lumped in all punk-derived music under 'alternative', but secondary sources by and large don't abide by this reductionism (and to emphasize, it's mainly the American record and radio industry that does this). Additionally, "alternative radio stations" don't and never have played exclusively alt-rock, so you can't base arguments upon that. The format started out as "rock of the '80s" before transforming into modern rock, which explains the inclusion of post-punk and New Wave artists. More recently, when alt-rock declined in popularity at the turn of the century, alternative stations began playing a lot of nu metal and Metallica. I even heard Eminem a couple of times on my home town alternative station. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:06, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually this isn't strictly true. Two of the most prominent books on Alternative music, Dave Thompson's Alternative Rock and Steve Taylor's The A to X of Alternative Music include Joy Division and lots of other post-punk and new wave bands. Alternative music is not the same as 'alt rock', and 'alternative' was used long before the glossy commercial alt rock of the late 80s. That said, a project such as this should avoid the lack of focus that would result from including too much content.--Michig (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)...and we aleady have specific wikiprojects for punk and new wave. Post-punk is lacking a specific project, but it wouldn't fit well here.--Michig (talk) 10:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realzie that new wave has its own project. However, I stand by what I said about post-punk. Many post-punk bands (The Cure, New Order, U2, Echo and the Bunnymen, etc.) went on to pioneer alternative rock. By the way, Allmusic.com lists Joy Division as an alternative rock band. And I'm pretty sure that nu metal is alternative. Sbrianhicks (talk) 23:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Allmusic has only added the alternative rock tag to the Joy Division entry on the site in the last year or so, even though the bio for the band their and their genre entries establish they aren't an alt-rock band. I actually contacted them about that, but they never replied regarding the issue. Nu metal isn't alternative rock; it's a modern update to metal. Additionally, any post-punk/New Wave band that went on to make alternative rock records have most likely already been tagged by the project (the ones you listed above already are). WesleyDodds (talk) 02:36, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Both those books aren't the best sources for classifying artists under the genre, since they lump in groups that aren't considered alternative by a majority of sources. For example, the Thompson book includes entries on Culture Club, the Clash, Dead or Alive, Duran Duran, Ultravox, and (of all things) Bananarama. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

So even when I present you with a reliable source, you still say it isn't reliable. Wikipedia even considers post-punk revival as alternative, but not post-punk. I really don't see what it would hurt adding Joy Division. Their influence on alternative music as a whole is massive. By the way, I think that Allmusic lists nu metal as a form of alternative metal. And what about bands like Nickelback, All-American Rejects, and especially Linkin Park etc.? Also, what about many indie band articles that aren't under the project? Can I simply add the tag to them since indie music is under our project? Thanks. Sbrianhicks (talk) 04:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Consensus of sources doesn't categorize Joy Division as alt-rock; even Allmusic described it as a forerunner of the genre (per my explanation above) so Allmusic adding a genre tag to the side of the band's page recently doesn't mean much (particularly given Allmusic will add incorrect tags on occasion; more than once I've seen bands labeled "grunge" and "post-grunge", which given the nature of the genres isn't applicable). Furthermore, we don't include influences under the project scope, for the simple reason that that's out of the project parameters. Post-punk revival is an alt-rock genre specifically because it's alt-rock bands recontexualizing the post-punk sound in the alternative/indie rock vein. Allmusic lists alt-metal as a metal/hard rock genre, last I checked. Yes, tag any band that would be classified as indie rock with the project banner. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Where is Allmusic's page on nu metal? I can't find it. The only place I see it mentioned is where it is under alternative metal. If no one answers me about bands like All-American rejects, Nickelback, Linkin Park etc., then I will take it upon myself to tag them under this project. By the way, it may seem from my tone that I'm being an ass, but I'm not; just trying to help the wiki's articles. Thanks. Sbrianhicks (talk) 00:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

That's alright. Just bear in mind that while Allmusic is a great resource, it's not the end-all be-all, and it can make mistakes, like any other reliable source. You always have to keep all other reliable sources in mind, and always value the biographies and genre page prose over the tags, which on occasion are added indiscriminately. Allmusic doesn't have a page for nu metal since it considers nu metal a type of alternative metal (bear in mind that the Allmusic genre page on alternative metal hasn't been updated since around 2000); other sources like Ian Christe's heavy metal history Sound of the Beast describe it as a descendant of alternative metal. I believe All-American Rejects is already tagged under the project, and Nickelback should be (being one of the key post-grunge bands of the 2000s), but Linkin Park is merely a nu metal band, and there's been past discussion about the fact that editors on Linkin Park articles haven't made convincing arguments based on sources for them being alt-rock. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

When they first started, they were nu metal. Their new sound has been compared to Radiohead and Pink Floyd by some critics. If you'd like, you could listen to newer songs like The Catalyst, Shadow of the Day, Leave Out All the Rest, etc. on Youtube and you'll see that its standard alt-rock.Sbrianhicks (talk) 19:08, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Help needed

An IP, 189.69.90.78 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), went on a rampage today changing tens or hundreds of instances of the band name "Red Hot Chili Peppers" to "The Red Hot Chili Peppers". He also changed genres from "alternative" to "funk" in many places despite consensus that reliable sources and discussion are needed for such changes. I blocked him for disruption and reverted many of his changes, but there are many left and I'm out of time. If anyone can look at his contribs that haven't been reverted and revert as necessary, I'd appreciate it. --Andy Walsh (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Also operating under 189.110.75.68 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Whoever this is has been plaguing the project for a while. --Andy Walsh (talk) 20:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)