Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alternative music/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alternative music

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 02:46, 28 October 2019 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alternative music) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 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)

Where/How do I nominate an article for quality class improvement?

This may be the wrong place to ask this and if so, I apologize. I'm relatively new to Wikipedia editing and I've been able to figure out pretty much everything else on my own but am having trouble with this issue. Any schooling is appreciated... thanks! Pottsduck —Preceding undated comment added 00:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC).

Apart from good articles and featured articles, there is no nomination required; you can go ahead and change quality class yourself. Just curious, what is the article in question?—indopug (talk) 03:43, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Mates of State Pottsduck —Preceding undated comment added 23:14, 13 January 2011 (UTC).

RfC at Talk:Weezer

There is an RfC at Talk:Weezer in order to reach consensus regarding whether the Weezer album Death to False Metal is considered a studio album, if anyone would like to contribute. Angryapathy (talk) 14:51, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

FLRC

I have nominated the Lightening Bolt discography for deletion as I think it doesn't meet current standards of a Featured List, articles are typically reviewed for 2 weeks. Afro (Talk) 16:04, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion

I have nominated Bloc Party discography for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 15:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Look at that, less than an hour later, and everything's fixed. That was productive.  狐 FOX  16:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

FLRC

I have nominated Wilco discography for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Afro (Talk) 05:47, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

It was 20 years ago today...

The following seminal (and not so seminal) alternative rock albums turn 20 this year. If we can collaborate to bring them upto featured status, we could pitch for a spot on the Main Page on the date of the 20th anniversary of their release:

There's also Blood Sugar Sex Magik, but that's already been on the Main Page. Comments? Additions to the list? Gameplan?—indopug (talk) 11:36, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I would be interested in helping out with Gish if anyone is interested. It would bring some recognition to a sometimes overlooked album. I saw Smashing Pumpkins a few weeks ago and someone sitting next to me was telling his wife that Siamese Dream was their first album... --Andy Walsh (talk) 15:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
And you told him good? :)  狐 FOX  16:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
I did. :) Pulled a large pile of sources last night for Gish, also. Looks like a good opportunity to expand, since the existing article is not very extensive. For those of you who might avoid working with me because you think I act like a dick at FAC, I'm not really that bad of a guy. --Andy Walsh (talk) 15:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
God, Smashing Pumpkins are probably my favorite band, but Billy Corgan tries his very best to kill my interest in whatever he is doing these days.
I'm trying to remember how much info is available on Gish. That 2001 Guitar World covers it a bit, but I'm not sure what else there is, source-wise. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Whenever I need a chuckle I listen to Teargarden songs on YouTube.—indopug (talk) 17:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Slow going on the sources so far. Found a few things in Rolling Stone and Guitar player. --Andy Walsh (talk) 00:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I assume "not-so-seminal" covers Leisure (What's the legendary '90s British alt-rock band with a worse debut album, Blur or Radiohead? U-DECIDE!). Also, there's Bandwagonesque, which I know has its fans. And of course, the ur-text for Creed.WesleyDodds (talk) 10:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

20th anniversary of Achtung Baby means that it's also the 20th anniversary of Negativland's U2 (EP). Looks like there's more about the EP & the aftermath of its release in the band's article than in the EP's article. I might have to take a look to see if I can find some sources. My other major musical recollection from 1991 would be Julian Cope's Peggy Suicide (4 March), but it is probably too obscure these days for front page coverage -- Foetusized (talk) 13:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

There are also albums from 1981 (Juju) and 2001 (Is This It). Not alt-rock, but it is common knowledge that 1971 is the greatest year in music history.—indopug (talk) 17:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Also thirty years ago: Radio Free Europe (song). WesleyDodds (talk) 02:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I've always thought the lead to Nevermind should be longer, so if anyone wants to take a stab at it . . . WesleyDodds (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

The King of Limbs

New Radiohead album just announced and coming out on Saturday means A LOT of edits in the next few days. Keep an eye out for this one. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Already there's an argument brewing over there...  狐 FOX  00:56, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Stats on music projects

See Table showing productivity/size of the 48 music projects for information about this project and other music groups. --Kleinzach 07:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Radiohead is the TFA for March 25

Heads up: Radiohead will be the Main Page Featured Article soon. I unfortunately will be too busy that day to help maintain the article during the inevitable edit storm, so here's letting everyone else know to keep an eye on the page. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:37, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Music magazine archives, databases

I was wondering if anybody could direct me towards some online archives or databases for searching music related magazines. I'm a college student so if its university related I can probably get access. I'm primarily looking for British music magazines at the moment like NME, Melody Maker, Wire, etc. But American magazines would be nice too like Alternative Press, Rolling Stone, etc. Thanks. -- Noj r (talk) 19:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Check out the website Rocks Back Pages. Most of the stuff is pay to access, but they always have a selection of free articles. Google Books offers back issues of Spin. WesleyDodds (talk)
Thanks for replying. I also found this blog where someone scans select articles from back issues of NME and Melody Maker. Its been very helpful so far. Maybe other editors will find it useful as well. -- Noj r (talk) 17:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Remember that you can only link to official reproductions of old articles. If an article is reproduced on a fansite, don't link to it in the article. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
What blog is this?—indopug (talk) 01:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I reference the articles sans the blog. Indopug, I'm sorry I forgot to include a link. Here it is: Archived Music Press I plan on rewriting some shoegaze articles so this blog was pretty helpful in collecting sources. -- Noj r (talk) 17:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Nirvana bootleg recordings

Nirvana bootleg recordings is an article started in 2008 by a briefly active new user who primarily edited this page, and it's sources exclusively using fansites. Should it even exist? WesleyDodds (talk) 06:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

No. Do you want to try a PROD first, or directly AfD it?—indopug (talk) 08:30, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
IPs edit the page on occasion, so AFD might be the best course. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Zoo TV Tour featured article nomination

I just nominated Zoo TV Tour for Featured Article status. If you could review the article and visit the nomination page to provide your feedback, I would appreciate it. Thanks. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The nomination has been open for a few weeks now, but has only gotten minimal attention. If someone from this project is capable of reviewing the article and providing their feedback, I'd greatly appreciate it - I'd hate for the nomination to be closed due to lack of comments. Thanks. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 17:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Midnight Oil

Shall I tag Midnight Oil as Mid or High Importance? I'm leaning towards High since they very well are the most prominent/important Aussie alt-rock band. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Nine Inch Nails

Per the recent Mfd on Wikipedia:WikiProject Nine Inch Nails perhaps this can now be made into a taskforce of this project? Thanks. --Kleinzach 08:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

What's the easiest way to go about doing so? I once before turned a defunct WikiProject into a taskforce of this one (the Smashing Pumpkins project) and it was a very tedious process. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:20, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

OK Computer 33 1/3

Hi, does anyone own a copy of the Ok Computer book in the 33 1/3 series? A few of us are working on OK Computer to bring it to FAC soon, but that is the one major source we are currently missing. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Alternative metal

Hey, just wondering why alternative metal bands like Marilyn Manson, Evanescence, Linkin Park, etc. aren't covered under our project. Alternative metal is obviously a subgenre of alternative rock, so we should be covering it. Sbrianhicks (talk) 16:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually after reading sources over the years, alternative metal doesn't seem to be widely accepted as an alt-rock subgenre, but rather a metal one. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:40, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
So then why is it called "alternative" metal? Do you have any sources to back this up? Sbrianhicks (talk) 17:26, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Genre names don't work like scientific nomenclature, so having "Alternative" in the title isn't terribly important (see also: no direct relation between New Wave and New Wave of British Heavy Metal. As for your second question, the primary sources are Allmusic and Ian Christe's metal history Sound of the Beast. As those sources establish, there are alt-metal bands that do cross over into the alt-rock category and some that don't, but they are all essentially metal bands. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:43, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
I understand what you mean, but much of alternative metal (though not all of course) seems to be based in alternative rock. Much of the bands label themselves as alternative and many are influenced primary by alternative rock (especially grunge) bands. For instance Three Days Grace self-identify as an alternaitve rock band and, as they cleary state, they were influeced primarily by Seattle alt rock bands like Nirvana, Alice in Chains, Sunny Day Real Estate, etc. They just happen to be influenced by Black Sabbath, thus they get labled as "metal." I know that self identification does not usually matter, but in this case it is not just one band that is self-identifying as such. There are many, many others. I feel hopeless debating with someone who has been listening to alt rock since before I was born, but I am giving it a shot anyway.  :) Sbrianhicks (talk) 16:51, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Spacemen 3 wiki article

The article about band Spacemen 3 exists in Alternative music wikiproject.

I am posting here to advise that I have recently started to do a large overhaul, rewrite and expansion of thsi article.

I am currently part way through this process. I have add the 'undergoing major reconstruction' tag within the article.

I have opened up a debate section on the article's talk page.

I keen to locate sources for citations. I am currently using the following sources: Erik Morse's book; amg website; and music press articles, interviews and reviews. If anyone has any other source suggestions, please let me know. Thanks.
Also, if someone could have a quick look at the article's structure/headings and section ordering, AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS, and give me some feedback, that would be very helpful, as I have not worked on a band biography article before on wiki. thanks.

Roland Sparkes (talk) 17:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I've FINISHED re-doing the Wikipedia article on Spacemen 3. I should be very grateful, please, if someone from this project group could give it a look over, and provide feeback on how it may needs to be changed or could be improved. Also, can it's rating be re-assessed now? Many thanks.Roland Sparkes (talk) 12:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Courtney Love/GA1

Courtney Love has been going through a lengthy Good Article review, and is now close to being listed. There now needs to be a bit of tidying up done - trimming some excessive detail, and a bit of copy-editing, as well as building up the lead a bit more. This is one of the top viewed articles on Wikipedia and is on an important yet complex subject. Any assistance, even if only to proof read one of the sections, would be much appreciated. SilkTork ✔Tea time 17:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Caelum Bliss

Should this article be deleted? - RoyBoy 04:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

List-class articles

Playing around, I notice this project doesn't recognize List-class articles, even though it does recognize FL articles. Is that a mistake? – Muboshgu (talk) 15:51, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

We don't use list class, for it's more helpful for us to gauge the quality of each list, just as the Discographies WikiProject does (which is sensible, given most of our lists are discographies). WesleyDodds (talk) 08:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Ongoing projects

Hey it's been a while since we've had big drives here, but feel free to mention any alt-rock articles you're doing heavy work on here, so we can pool efforts and experience together. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:16, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Nine Inch Nails

A notice on WikiProject Nine Inch Nails explains that that project has been merged with this one, but the actual merger, which should have resulted in a page called Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music/Nine Inch Nails, was never done. What do members here want to do Nine Inch Nails? Do you want it merged? Thanks. --Kleinzach 14:59, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Freak Folk/Nu-Folk

These are currently merged when they refer to different eras, different sounds. I don't know enough to write them but I do know the current situation is awful. Thinking of taking down references to nu-folk in articles so people don't get confused. Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.168.6 (talk) 23:16, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's History Month

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Alt music will have interest in putting on events related to women's roles in alternative music; as performers, promoters, producers, label owners, etc. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hail to the Thief

Doing some work on the above-mentioned article; would appreciate some help. What a pro (talk) is on fire. 10:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Satori in Paris (song)

I've been considering the above article, about a Bauhaus single that was only released as a free addition to early copies of the Press the Eject and Give Me the Tape LP. It has several issues, including:

  • The article suffered a drive-by renaming in 2009, changing the name from "Satori in Paris (single)" to "Satori in Paris (song)", in spite of the fact that there is no song on the single named "Satori in Paris". The single (both sides of which were recorded live in Paris) seems to have been named for the Jack Kerouac novella Satori in Paris, which is why that simpler article name is not available.
  • The article is tagged as unreferenced. I've got some good books on Bauhaus that I could use to add references, but I have not yet done so, because....
  • The article is also tagged as probably not meeting Wikipedia:Notability (music) and I have come to agree with that assessment.

After some thought over the past few days, my new idea is to merge "Satori in Paris (song)" into Press the Eject and Give Me the Tape, creating a new section for the single. Any disagreement or counter-proposals? -- Foetusized (talk) 14:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

FLRC: Load Records discography

I have nominated Load Records discography for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 21:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Pitchfork's Album of the Year template

Hi, everyone! I have created this template for all of the Pitchfork's number-one albums of the year. Did you liked? Thanks for the attention! --MatheusLPereira (talk) 01:49, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey everyone, I notice that the number of project GAs has exploded in the last two years or so, but the number of FAs is pretty much the same. Anyone currently working on articles they hope to get to Featured status? I would be down to help, and I can think of a few other editors who might pitch in. WesleyDodds (talk) 14:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hoping to get Pretty on the Inside to meet the FAC, if you're interested in helping out! Idiotchalk (t@lk) 21:08, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Cool, I'll give it a look soon. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, is anyone interested in helping me go and review the state of our current Featured Articles? Users have come and gone, and even the ones who have stayed might balk at some of the citing faux pas they've made years ago, so a couple of these pages could use some heavy improvement. I've already done a substantial amount of cleanup on a few neglected FAs in the past week. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

OK Computer at FAC

One of our most important articles, the page on Radiohead's landmark 1997 album OK Computer, is now a Featured Article Candidate. Drop by the FAC page to lend your two cents or more. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:35, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Alice in Chains genre debates

For those interested, there's a discussion over at Talk:Alice in Chains#Proposal for the addition of 'heavy metal' in the lead with 'rock' kept intact, where a suggestion has been made to put "sludge metal" in the infobox. Tarc (talk) 15:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I came here requesting an answer to a question that has evolved from this discussion at Alice in Chains. Since Tarc posted, we have suggested an alternate solution for the lead, but we are stuck on the issue of genres. I too invite anyone interested to come read what we have said so far and add insight / opinions. I had thought of asking other editors who watch AiC associated articles (songs, albums, members) on those article talk pages to come add to our discussion, but there is no way I want to be seen as canvassing :(( My question is: is there any MOS directive for articles of musicians, songs, albums that limits the number of genres that can go in an infobox? I mention Melvins because they have nine and we are comparing AiC article to Melvins because of the lead. I searched Wikipedia high and low two nights ago and came up with nothing. Since AiC is a featured article, we are attempting to be very careful to reach consensus prior to amending the article. An answer to the question of genre limits in infoboxes would be helpful. Thanks muchly Fylbecatulous talk 00:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
I have a draft of a "guide to genres" guideline I was working on for music pages in my userspace years ago that I never finished. My rule of thumb was four genres in a band infobox, max. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:50, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for this (I mostly guard the gates against surreptitious addition of genres) and as well, thank you for adding quite a wise comment to our discussion on Alice in Chains. All the best Fylbecatulous talk 14:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
While it doesn't discuss genre count, Template:Infobox_musical_artist#genre does say "Aim for generality (e.g. Hip hop rather than East Coast hip hop)." My feeling is that an article like Melvins would be better served with Heavy metal replacing the multiple subgenres of metal included in the infobox list. -- Foetusized (talk) 10:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Aha, thanks. I had a feeling I'd read something to the effect of "try to be general" somewhere along the lien, but cpould not at all remember where. Tarc (talk) 12:43, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I have that template on my watchlist, actually and did read that. ツ Your parsing that guideline (and the one by WesleyDodds of herding genres down to four) into a practical utilization is helpful. But going to articles such as Melvins and instituting that would cause havoc. Editors have such allergic reactions to the issue of genres. (I've had a few cases of hives my own self). This is why it would be nice to have a Wikipedia style directive to stand on for precedent. Thanks again. Fylbecatulous talk 14:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
If we go by WesleyDodds's soi-disant Rule of thumb of his unfinished draft of guide to genres then it's wise to keep just heavy metal, blues rock & punk rock in the genre section of AiC infobox in the way Jerry Cantrell, the founder of the band himself described the band's sound.Because he never wanted to associate with alternative & grunge e.g. when a Guitar World interviewer described the band as alternative rock's classic band, Cantrell satirically replied classic rock's alternative band. Bloomgloom talk 16:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I would like to transport this discussion back to our AiC talk page, because it will alter how we proceed and I don't want to have us deciding in two places. I don't know the protocol; do we link this up? (confused) Fylbecatulous talk 21:56, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Nevermind...(oh well, whatever). Things seem to have gone downhill back at Alice in Chains and I'm afraid the article is now in danger of becoming unstable. For the sake of preventing further provocation, further discussion at this time probably is not indicated. Thanks everyone. Fylbecatulous talk 22:16, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Who calls AIC blues rock . . . ? WesleyDodds (talk) 11:52, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
A band isn't the final word on its genre. Otherwise, Motorhead couldn't be called metal, The Cure couldn't be called goth, and no one except for Mudhoney could be called grunge. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Jerry Cantrell himself stated the presence of Blues in AiC's music.And man I know, that a band isn't the final word on it's genre since there are millions & millions of media worldwide.But, at least the words of a major band member deserves a certain amount of priority since he's making the music. Bloomgloom talk 14:37, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. As described above, it's common for artists to reject genre categorizations they don't like. Anyway, what Cantrell actually says is "We're a lot of different things... I don't quite know what the mixture is, but there's definitely metal, blues, rock and roll, maybe a touch of punk." He's saying there's an element of blues in his band's music, not "We're a blues-rock band". Those are two very different statements. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:23, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Out of curiosity . . .

Was the Olympics coverage in August really enough to make Beady Eye the project's most-visited page that month? Compare its traffic to the Blur page, for instance. Funny thing is, it didn't pick up very many edits during that time. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:16, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Singles that have sold over 1 million copies in the UK

Heads up: the Official Charts Company has revealed which singles have sold over one million copies in the United Kingdom, along with sales figures. Though I see only four songs by artists that fall under this project (Oasis, New Order, Kings of Leon, and Gotye), it should be a useful reference nonetheless. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:48, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

For those of you who like working on discography pages, please take note that Foo Fighters discography has been nominated for removal as a Featured List. You can view the nomination here, and help bring the list back to FL standard if you can. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:28, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Adding articles to project

Hi. I've been doing some work on The Godfathers and creating articles for their albums. I think that they would fit as a part of this project. However, I'm unsure of the procedure for adding the template to articles, or articles to projects. I want to get consensus/permission before adding anything. Thanks. Natt the Hatt (talk) 22:56, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Pretty much just go ahead and do it. If you are uncertain about importance level or class assessment, leave those fields blank and someone will eventually fill them out. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:34, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I appreciate your speedy reply. Natt the Hatt (talk) 03:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Curve

Move Give It Away

A move discussion is taking place on the page Give It Away. Please give input. Oldag07 (talk) 06:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Powderfinger FAR

I have nominated Powderfinger for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:08, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposal to change category name to "Albums produced or engineered by Steve Albini"

Hi. I have started a discussion at Category talk:Albums produced by Steve Albini to change the category name to "Albums produced or engineered by Steve Albini". If anyone has opinions on the matter, please take a look. Thanks. Moisejp (talk) 21:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Vital articles

There is a discussion occuring here, regarding which music articles should be deemed vital to the Wikipedia project. Your input would be appreciated. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:57, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone have the Oasis album Heathen Chemistry booklet ?!?!

If you do then can you tell me what the credits and personnel are for "Stop Crying Your Heart Out", "Thank You for the Good Times" and "Shout It Out Loud" in the booklet please? Either on "Stop Crying Your Heart Out's talk page or on my user talk please, it would be very appreciated.  — AARON • TALK 19:47, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Bloc Party FTRC

The Bloc Party Featured Topic is currently at FTRC. The review can be found here. GamerPro64 15:51, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

List of grunge supergroups

List of grunge supergroups was an article that was boldly converted into a redirect to Grunge (an article within the scope of this project) in October 2012, the redirect have now been nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 April 18#List of grunge supergroups. Your comments in the discussion would be most welcome. Thryduulf (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Please see the AfD. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 06:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Beth Orton discography

The Beth Orton discography is currently a Featured List candidate. Please leave comments to help this list reach FL status. Thank you! – Underneath-it-All (talk) 18:37, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Portal:U2 for peer review

Miss Bono and myself have requested a portal peer review for Portal:U2.
We would appreciate any helpful advice at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/U2/archive1.
Thanks in advance and happy editing! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 14:28, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Monthly Newsletter and Out-of-date Tasks

I'm wondering what happened to the monthly newsletter? It is listed under the tasks section as if it is an up-to-date element of the page. However, when I tried subscribing, it looked like the last update was from 2009. Am I looking in the incorrect space? Additionally, I believe a lot of the tasks listed on the main project page may be out-of-date. Mewhho18 (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

The Make-Up discography's FLRC

I have nominated The Make-Up discography for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. GamerPro64 03:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 04:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Timelines in articles

There is currently a discussion regarding the use of timelines in articles about musical groups going at Talk:The Smashing Pumpkins#Timeline. Weigh in your thoughts, if you care. — MusikAnimal talk 15:43, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Garbage (album)

There is edit warring and genre conversation going on at Garbage (album) talk page. Any further input would be greatly appreciated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lipsha

Interested editors may wish to join this AfD related to an unreleased Flaming Lips album. –Chase (talk / contribs) 17:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Requesting an new Assessment quality scale to 'The Narrative's article

Hi, first of, The Narrative article was included in the WikiProject Alternative music in its very beginning, so I think I don't need to request it here again. I've been working on improvements for the article such as newspapers featured posts, magazines, campaigns, albuns and singles from its creation to today. As I said, the template was added when the article was created, and after this improvements, the quality scale of it wasn't reassessed. I search for a specific topic for it, but I don't find out, so I request here to discuss a new quality scale for the article. Its now rated as Start-Class, and I think it deserves to be at least a C-Class quality scale. I don't know if this is the right topic to request this, but, if someone knows one please let me know. Thanks -- Murilo Grillo (talk) 16:19, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Nine Inch Nails FAR

I have nominated Nine Inch Nails for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Laurent (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Kid A

I have nominated Kid A for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKiernan (talk) 07:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Ghosts I–IV FAR

I have nominated Ghosts I–IV for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. LADY LOTUS • TALK 11:40, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Discussion about Björk genres

Hi all, there is a discussion at Talk:Björk about which genres, and how many genres, should be used to describe the artist in the article's infobox. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Grammy Awards task force

You are invited to join the Grammy Awards task force, a subproject of WikiProject Awards and prizes dedicated to improving articles and lists related to the Grammy Awards. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page and add your name to the list of participants.

FAR listing

I have nominated Flea (musician) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.

Talk:Breaking Benjamin

There is an ongoing discussion on infobox genres. Please feel free to join. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 21:41, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

User changing "are" to "is" and "were" to "was" in lots of band articles.

User Bryce Carmony seems hell bent on changing "are" to "is" and "were" to "was" in band articles, despite the band names in question being collective nouns and dispite protests from other Wikipedians. There's an ongoing discussion about this that I would urge users to chime in on, here -- User_talk:Bryce_Carmony#Disruptive_editing_over_.22are.22_and_.22is.22. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 00:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Not at all hellbent. there is an established convention of BrE to treat bands as collective nouns always. so every band I see that is or was I change to are and were if they are a Brittish band or otherwise would be written about in BrE but when it comes to AmE we don't have that standard (if you look the majority of band articles are the singular over the plural) which is conducive with WP:Titles. To clarify Kohou's simplification. Bryce Carmony (talk) 01:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Related ANI discussion here. JohnInDC (talk) 01:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Canadian RPM Rock/Alternative 30 number-one single

There are succession boxes for numerous (all?) Canadian RPM Rock/Alternative 30 number-one singles at the bottom of their respective articles. For instance Song 2 and The End Is the Beginning Is the End. I'm not sure this is really warranted given there are tons of applicable charts, awards, certifications, etc, out there, for which we aren't using succession boxes. Any objections to removing them? — MusikAnimal talk 00:22, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

National albums/music charts

Proposal to rename, where appropriate, national music charts articles to territory and format rather than official name, so Swedish music charts rather than Sverigetopplistan, etc. Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Record Charts#National Albums/Music Charts. SilkTork ✔Tea time 10:40, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Band member timeline standards discussion at WikiProject Musicians

I wanted everyone here to know about the current discussion happening at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians#Create Member Section/Timeline Standards that may put an end to all of the edit warring and inconsistency surround band member timelines. — DLManiac (talk) 06:50, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Discussion regarding terminology of singles

I have started a discussion regarding how Wikipedia should define singles. Please go here to discuss.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:00, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Courtney Love FA article nomination

Hello all, I have been working on the Courtney Love article over a number of years now, and it is currently a Featured Article nominee. I wanted to post here to see if any editors would potentially be interested in doing a review. So far, there are 2/2 reviews supporting it for FA, but I wanted to reach out to some other related WikiProjects to see if anyone would be interested or willing to participate in the review process. Given as divisive of a figure she is, it's been a bit difficult getting interest from editors, in spite of how high-traffic of an article it is. Thank you! Drown Soda (talk) 20:02, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Wonder Stuff timeline

I've proposed adding a members timeline to the page for The Wonder Stuff. There don't seem to be many regular editors over there, so I'd appreciate it if anyone from the wider project could sanity-check it. I've put the proposed timeline on Talk:The Wonder Stuff.

In general I think membership timelines are useful for bands which have had a reasonable amount of membership change - I don't know if there's any policy on this? TSP (talk) 13:48, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Info prior to subject relevant?

Is info relevant although it is prior to the subject? I added info on Dallon Weekes stating why and when the he was recruited into the band, Panic! at the Disco. [1] Although referenced by in-line citations, a user is reverting the edits due to the info being prior to the subject's recruitment, to which he says is irrelevant to the subject due to the info being prior to is association with the group. Although it is prior to the subject's recruitment, it gives valid, referenced info of the reasons the subject was recruited. Nowhere is info prior to a subject's history with a group forbidden in an article page, especially when it is relevant to the topic.

Please comment on the current RfC here. Thank you. Sekyaw (talk) 22:09, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Math rock, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:07, 3 October 2016 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Greetings WikiProject Alternative music/Archive 7 Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 17:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Pearl Jam discography#Split

The split proposal will affect the status of Pearl Jam discography as Featured List. I invite you to comment. --George Ho (talk) 01:15, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Ongoing RM at Talk:Round Here (disambiguation)

I invite you to the ongoing RM discussion. --George Ho (talk) 13:03, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject proposal: Psychedelic music

If interested, please offer support for a WikiProject focused on psychedelic music.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Looking for FA support for Courtney Love article

Hello all, I've worked quite extensively on the Courtney Love article, and have nominated it for FA status several times but have failed to garner enough supporters to further it beyond the nomination process. I believe the article absolutely fulfills the criteria, and I have gotten supports for promotion each time, just not enough. If anyone would mind looking it over and leaving comments/supporting if you feel so, I'd be very grateful. There does not seem to be many people willing to do reviews of it during the nomination process—I know she is a divisive figure—but I'm hoping I can gather some support to get an FA promotion. Thank you! --Drown Soda (talk) 05:32, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Losing My Religion

Losing My Religion, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music/Archive 7/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Alternative music.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Alternative music, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Content (Joywave album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Content (Joywave album) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Content (Joywave album) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jax 0677 (talk) 16:32, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Alternative_music

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 13:01, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Post-punk revival

An editor is looking for some expert comment here. Can anyone here comment at Talk:Post-punk revival#Conflation. AIRcorn (talk) 01:26, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Flying Lesbians - stub label removed

Hello, the stub status of the "Flying Lesbians" Lemma could now be removed. Best, julius f2 Julius f2 (talk) 09:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   10:53, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Alternative_music/Archive_7&oldid=923367898"