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)
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)
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)
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)
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
