Jump to content

Talk:Heavy metal music

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WockWole (talk | contribs) at 17:20, 11 April 2021 (Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2021: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleHeavy metal music is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 10, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 5, 2003Featured article candidatePromoted
April 4, 2007Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article

Template:Vital article

Etymology question

If William S. Burroughs used the terms "heavy metal people" and "metal music" in his novel "Nova Express" in 1964, then how can the claim be made that the 1967 album "Featuring the Human Host and the Heavy Metal Kids" by "Hapshash and the Coloured Coat" was the first use of the term "heavy metal" in the context of music? Maybe my calendar is out of date, but doesn't 1967 come after 1964? I'm sure that Burroughs didn't have in mind the type of music currently categorized as "heavy metal" today, but the term "metal music" is rather specific in its context. I could see if Burroughs only used the term "heavy metal people", but if he also used the term "metal music" in the same novel as well, to me that's definitively before the 1967 album.

Fgoron2000 (talk) 20:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen the hard policy at WP:No original research? You would need a third party source examining Burroughs and making the same conclusion you make. Your own analysis is not enough for Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 21:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2020

Punctuation: missing comma after ripped.

Change (under 1.3 Image and fashion):

The classic uniform of heavy metal fans consists of light colored, ripped frayed or torn blue jeans, black T-shirts, boots, and black leather or denim jackets.

To (classic comma):

The classic uniform of heavy metal fans consists of light colored, ripped, frayed or torn blue jeans, black T-shirts, boots, and black leather or denim jackets.

Or to (Oxford comma):

The classic uniform of heavy metal fans consists of light colored, ripped, frayed, or torn blue jeans, black T-shirts, boots, and black leather or denim jackets.
Schneckenberg (talk) 16:37, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Nice parsing! I went with classic. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:49, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT THE HELL IS POPPY AND ROBERT CHRISTGAU DOING HERE???

The Women in heavy metal section has already tons of overlapping contents with the Characteristics section.

Now you guys bring Poppy over here??? Poppy is not metal. PMRC are posers. And Robert Christgau never likes metal. This section is trash! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vc06697 (talkcontribs) 03:48, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell are you doing here with this attitude? (WP:SHOUT) isento (talk) 18:56, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy Metal Navigation Boxes

Could someone please put all the Heavy metal templates in a navigation box (as has been done with Electronica, Rock music, and Punk rock)? 2601:C7:C201:C640:6402:2D5F:20D:8D78 (talk) 21:00, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. (CC) Tbhotch 21:38, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

‘Women in Metal’ section balance issues

As a result of edits over the last year or so, the ‘women in metal’ section has acquired a pronounced Anglocentric skew, despite the UK not exactly being known for female metal musicians. The result is that it now devotes more space to documenting the opinions of British journalists, pop stars and non-notable academics, than it does to female metal musicians and their work, and presents an outdated, even stereotypical view of the genre.

Main section (first three paragraphs)

First paragraph (about the history of women in metal) – OK, but rather short. Needs to be expanded.

Second paragraph (about Poppy, Grimes and Rina S) – most of this is puffery based on an Anglocentric opinion piece in the Guardian (not a reliable source of fact). Needs to be trimmed back to just the fact of Poppy’s nomination for the Grammy. Also, the claim of 'first female artist...' is dubious:

  • In This Moment was also nominated for the same award in the same year
  • The article needs to be consistent on whether Halestorm is a metal band or not. The previous paragraph lists Halestorm as an example of a female fronted metal band, but then doesn't mention that Halestorm actually won the Grammy for the combined category of 'best Hard Rock/Metal performance' in 2012.

The third paragraph about women behind the scenes could probably be expanded, but it’s OK.

Sexism subsection

This is an important and potentially sensitive topic, but the current treatment is Anglocentric (apart from the first short paragraph about the US, it’s entirely about alleged sexism in the UK metal scene), long winded, does not include the views of current female musicians on this topic (for which sources exist i.e. interviews), is peppered with weasel words, contentious terms, and vague or redundant filler phrases, and a large chunk of opinion is copied verbatim from the Hill book but without the context that would be provided by reading the book. It also makes an unsourced claim that Hill is a ‘music academic’ (which doesn't seem to be supported by her ORCID bio).

Eggybacon (talk) 00:21, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding both sections of concerns - WP:SOFIXIT then. I don't believe anyone's challenging you. Some guy just expanded the section and wasn't able to account for the events of the entire world. Sergecross73 msg me 02:28, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK - thank you for the feedback. I will make a start. on this. Eggybacon (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was the guy who added the subsection, hastily and impulsively out of surprise that there wasn't anything about the topic in the article before. I don't remember how close my paraphrasing was, and I'm not going to argue over its quality, but I will say that this bio blurb of Hill says she's a university researcher and lecturer on topics related to popular music. So "music academic" seems like a fair description. isento (talk) 14:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, and same goes with the concerns about too much on Poppy/Grimes/Rina S. They were just done by some passerby over the course of a day or two. I support a mention of them, but I also support some trimming - all three are probably closer to "Cult following" than "commercial superstars". Sergecross73 msg me 15:13, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Side note - to be clear, I was actually referring to the guy who wrote all the Poppy stuff, not you, but as you note, it's the same sort of situation. Sergecross73 msg me 22:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2021

The re-direct to "Heavy metal (disambiguation)" should instead go to just "Heavy metal" (since it re-directs to that anyway). WockWole (talk) 17:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]