Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music Video
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Stub template
Please note that the name of the music video stub template has been changed, so that it is in line with stub template naming guidelines. Technically, any new stub template and category chould have been cleared first by proposing it at WP:WSS/P - that would have saved having to change its name. Also note that stub templates must feed into dedicated stub categories. If they don't they are a complete waste of time, since editors won't be able to find the articles marked with the template. I have created a category at Cat:Music video stubs to take the articles marked with {{music-video-stub}}. If you wish to create any more stub types, please follow the usual process! Thanks. Grutness...wha? 05:47, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Is this project needed?
This project seems rather pointless to me. Creating articles about music videos just seems to be splitting already small song articles into two separate articles. One for the song and one for the video. The information seemed fine to me when it was in the song articles. Why don't you make this project part of the songs project? Then you can encourage good writing about music videos without splitting small articles in two. --Moochocoogle 19:23, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
- Song ≠ Music video. It's not the same thing. The MTV Video Music Awards do not judge an artist by their song, but by their video. Music videos are their own separate category. That's why it's important that we have this project. There are many innovative music videos out there that deserve separate recognition. --The lorax 22:01, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that they are the same thing or that music videos do not deserve mention but can you see my point that it is silly to split articles that are already generally quite short into two when they read very well as they were? The music video is part of the marketing of a song. It can't exist without the song. Information on music videos should be included in the appropriate song article. --Moochocoogle 22:23, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- I do also have to add that the articles that are currently part of this project are not of very good quality. They are very short and without much chance of becoming longer. They also don't always follow the guidelines for writing about music. Remember, songs go in "quotes" and albums go in italics. --Moochocoogle 22:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- I agree. There are probably only a very, very small number of music videos that would require seperate articles. --FuriousFreddy 18:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- The rationale for a separate article is that a music video is a work of art produced by a film director, where as a song is a work of art produced by a musician. If a director or a film enthusiast wanted to inform him or herself about musc videos, he or she would have to go through a lot of song pages that don't have enough information on music videos. I agree that not every song with a video should have it's separate article, but nor should there be short information about it on song pages, when a music video could be potentially more important than the song itself. For example U.N.K.L.E.'s "Rabbit in your headlights", the song might not have created an impact in music as a whole an might be really unimportant, but the video is a turning point in the art form. --Alejandro Vesga 10 January 2006
- Maybe for some those few videos, but for videos such as the one for Coffee & TV, the article is just one short paragraph, it is poorly linked from the song article and not linked back at all. So far, this project only seems to have managed to make a mess of several song articles. --Moochocoogle 20:02, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- Patience, dude. If you want to work at making song articles better, that's your prerogative. This project is all about the music videos.--The lorax 21:10, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe for some those few videos, but for videos such as the one for Coffee & TV, the article is just one short paragraph, it is poorly linked from the song article and not linked back at all. So far, this project only seems to have managed to make a mess of several song articles. --Moochocoogle 20:02, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- The rationale for a separate article is that a music video is a work of art produced by a film director, where as a song is a work of art produced by a musician. If a director or a film enthusiast wanted to inform him or herself about musc videos, he or she would have to go through a lot of song pages that don't have enough information on music videos. I agree that not every song with a video should have it's separate article, but nor should there be short information about it on song pages, when a music video could be potentially more important than the song itself. For example U.N.K.L.E.'s "Rabbit in your headlights", the song might not have created an impact in music as a whole an might be really unimportant, but the video is a turning point in the art form. --Alejandro Vesga 10 January 2006
- I agree. There are probably only a very, very small number of music videos that would require seperate articles. --FuriousFreddy 18:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- I do also have to add that the articles that are currently part of this project are not of very good quality. They are very short and without much chance of becoming longer. They also don't always follow the guidelines for writing about music. Remember, songs go in "quotes" and albums go in italics. --Moochocoogle 22:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that they are the same thing or that music videos do not deserve mention but can you see my point that it is silly to split articles that are already generally quite short into two when they read very well as they were? The music video is part of the marketing of a song. It can't exist without the song. Information on music videos should be included in the appropriate song article. --Moochocoogle 22:23, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Hey Alejandro and others- I don't know if you've stopped by Videoville much, but there's quite a bit that's been happening over there. (Full disclosure, I own/maintain that site.) Anyway, I've been thinking about Videoville and this WikiProject for a while, and I've come to a sticking point. Alejandro asked me before about hosting the definitive music video articles on WikiPedia. While eventually that will probably happen, I wonder: Does it matter what DNS this information is on? Information is information, and while WikiPedia has a wider audience, I don't think there's as much activity happening on this site yet, as much as there seems to be at Videoville. Perhaps in the deep future we can migrate the entirety of Videoville info to WikiPedia? Somehow (i.e. include a videoville shortcut in WikiPedia's Interwiki map) they'll become connected?
In short, given that there's moderately more activity happening at Videoville, perhaps that's a better place (for the moment) to host this info? Thank you for your thoughts/criticism on this. --Kevathens 19:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jan Terri
you should have something about Jan Terri here, she came to prominence because of VHS tapes. i think she represents the nadir, or at least some sort of democratization of the Music Video Medium. Xsxex 15:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Membership
As it stands, there are two criteria used to determine whether a project qualifies for deletion. These are no activity for 3 months and no listed members. Right now, this project has no membership list and thus no members. I think it might be a good idea to change that situation. Badbilltucker 22:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Project Directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:
- User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
- User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
- User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
- User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
- User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
- User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
- User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
- User:Badbilltucker/Science directory
and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
