Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronic music

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Unknown
Not rated
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Electronic music, set up to organize and expand entries on Electronic music. It has been rated as unknown priority to this Wikiproject.
To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronic music: edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
  • Tag all relevant talk pages with the project template for publicity
  • Create a hierarchy definition and clean up existing categories
  • Create infoboxes as per WikiProject Music genres
  • Create stub categories and start sorting stubs
  • Article request: Ultra-Sonic
  • Get top importance genre articles to GA level.

Contents

[edit] Started WikiProject

The current categorization of Electronic music is rather messy (see Category:Electronic music). I started to do some cleaning up, but soon realised that it was going to be more work than I had initially anticipated and that some planning and organization was needed. That's the main reason for setting up this WikiProject. There's also an awful lot of articles in need of attention as well as other tasks that could benefit from coordination. Please add tasks here if you've got any ideas. Hagbard Celine 18:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Categorization

[edit] Current structure

Here's roughly how the hierarchy looks now (there's a lot of incosistency though):

Electronic music
    Electronic music festivals
        <festival>
    Electronic music genres
        Subgenre
            Sub-subgenre (style)
                ...
            <subgenre artists, albums, concepts, etc.> (messy at this level)
        <subgenre>
    Electronic music instruments
        Drum Machines
        Effects units
        ...
    Musical software
        Audio programming languages
        Music file formats
        ...
        <software>
    Electronic musicians
        Electronic music groups
            Subgenre groups
        Electronic musicians by country
            Nationality electronic musicians
            Nationality electronic music
        Electronic musicians by genre
            Subgenre musicians
                Subgenre groups
    Sampling
        <sampling>

Note: Lines enclosed in <> denote article level.

[edit] Proposed structure

Here's a proposal for restructuring the categories. Please comment or propose other ways to do this.

 Electronic music
     Electronic music artists
         Electronic music artists by country
             Nationality electronic music artists (e.g. British electronic music artists)
                 Nationality electronic music groups
         Electronic music artists by genre
             Subgenre artists (e.g. Ambient music artists)
         Electronic music groups
             Subgenre groups
     Electronic music festivals
     Electronic music genres
         Subgenre
             Subgenre artists
                 Subgenre groups
             Subgenre releases
                 Subgenre albums
                 Subgenre singles
             Sub-subgenre (style) (e.g. Goa in Trance category)
                 ...
     Electronic music production
         Electronic music instruments
         Musical software
         Sampling
     Electronic music releases
         Electronic music albums
         Electronic music singles
         Subgenre releases

Only category levels listed.

Relevant documentation:

Other musical genres for comparison:

Hagbard Celine 18:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay, it's been a while since anyone looked at this, but things are not done yet by a long shot. WikiProject Musicians recommends the following for individual musicians falling under a particular genre, in theory:
         Electronic musicians by nationality
             <Nationality> electronic musicians (e.g. British electronic music artists)
                 <Nationality> electronic musicians by <instrument>
                     <Nationality> electronic <instrumentalists>
         Electronic musicians by instrument
             Electronic <instrumentalists>
                 Electronic <instrumentalists> by nationality
                     <Nationality> electronic <instrumentalists>
(See Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Categorization/Progress for the system at work.) Of course, things are probably not going to end up like this, because we frankly don't know where Cat:Electronic musicians by genre fits. It's certainly going to have to fit somewhere because I can't see us actually making a category called "Electronic keyboardists by nationality" or "Electronic music producers by nationality", without subcategorizing it by electronic music subgenres; eg. "Synthpop keyboardists by nationality" or "House music producers by nationality".
Also, we haven't done anything about musical groups yet.
If anyone is watching this at all, we could use some input about this. –Unint 19:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
I started splitting and sorting categories by biggest nationalities and subgenres. For start I'm going to use "xxxx musicians" and "xxxx music groups". (where xxxx is genre/subgenre) Monni 23:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Excellent work so far on reviving a mostly-forgotten task! –Unint 06:02, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I didn't forget it at all... I was just working on the stub categories first. I'm going through house and dance musicians right now and then possibly double check techno musicians after that. I will be separating musicians and musical groups (bands, project groups etc.) while I go through the categories with CatScan. Monni 15:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Groups

I was going through groups of several different genres and found...

Category:American electronic music groups

Category:British electronic music groups

Category:German electronic music groups

I think these need proper populating.

Monni 19:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stub sorting

I've added a proposal for new stub categories ({{electronic-musician-stub}}, {{electronic-music-stub}}) on the stub sorting project page. Hagbard Celine 10:47, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Stub sorting project suggested {{electronic-album-stub}} too. Hagbard Celine 14:13, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Worked my way through the Musician stubs category and stub-sorted the entries I recognised by name into Electronic musician stubs. I've moved about 150 entries, but I'm sture there's still many entries that should be moved. We should take a look at the Category:Electronic musicians categories and mark anything appropriate as stubs too. Hagbard Celine 16:36, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Created {{electronic-album-stub}} (Category:Electronic album stubs). Started to stub-sort from Category:Album stubs, but realised that there should be a top-level electronic music album category to put all entries without any categories into before proceeding. Hagbard Celine 13:54, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject template

The project template ({{Electronic-music-project}}) has been added to Electronica and Breakbeat genres and subgenres talk-pages and I've done some minor cleanup on many of those articles. We should probably add the template to the other genre and subgenre talk-pages and any other relevant pages.

I'm not sure if there's any point in leaving the {{genre}} template, but I haven't removed it from anywhere yet. Hagbard Celine 12:52, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Finished tagging Ambient articles. Hagbard Celine 14:11, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Recent changes to related articles

To monitor recent changes to articles related to electronic music, I've created the page Wikipedia:WikiProject_Electronic_music/Electronic_music_recent_changes. Changes to articles listed on that page will show up on the special page Special:Recentchangeslinked/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Electronic_music/Electronic_music_recent_changes. Hagbard Celine 09:52, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lobo Halcyon

Has anyone noticed this link to racefortheprize dot com on any of the electronic pages? For the record, this links to the page for Lobo Halcyon, an electronic artist who doesn't seem to come up on AllMusicGuide. Does anyone know anything about him? --JB Adder | Talk 11:29, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

No, and why did you link it here? Sorry, just particularly sensitive after cleaning the external link hell that Electronic music was. Could you explain your question further? (removed link) ∴ here…♠ 07:05, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Sorry about the linking, my fault. Now, about the link; basically, this artist link has been appearing on some of the electronic music pages (I've noticed it on, and removed it from, Downtempo, and Karol Langner found it on Trip hop), added, working from the edit history, by 88.107.86.73. This, as has been stated below, is not the IP for the artist. I have my theories as to who (in a more broad, general sense) may have done this, but I'll keep my reservations about revealing them, because I just may be wrong.
All I ask of everyone is, if you find this link on any of the other electronic pages, to remove it without delay. --JB Adder | Talk 00:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm Lobo Halcyon, and I don't know why I have been added to any page here. I am not a major artist. Who has been doing this any ideas?

[edit] Cat:Electronica songs

Should this category be at Cat:Electronic songs instead? Seems to me that electronica is a subgenre? If so, how should I move it? --Qirex 06:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

although i don't mormally deal with individual song pages, i'd agree with your point. to move it you'd simply copy the [edited] content from here to here then change the category code on each individual page with the old one to the new one.

[edit] MusicBrainz

I see you have the MusicBrainz templates cited as resources. I've started a wikiproject to link applicable articles to MusicBrainz. Information on it can be found here and here. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 12:16, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

i created Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music a few hours ago but it's already up for afd. is the site notable enough for the article to warrent existing? --MilkMiruku 00:24, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I listed it for afd. Feel free to write a section into an appropriate article if you think it deserves attention beyond the already present external links. The page ranks 350,000+ on Alexa and does not, in my opinion, deserve it's own article. ∴ here…♠ 00:41, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Ishkur's site is a joke. A micky-take. The creator knows nor cares little for electronic music. Please stop using that site as a reference work.

  • I don't think anyone is actually using Ishkur as a serious resource. Wickethewok 15:37, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Then why is it listed at the bottom of the project page under resources? It should be removed. T-1 01:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed. T-1 16:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dance music

I've posted this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music genres#Dance music as well, but this concerns both projects.

I'd like to bring up something which I think needs considerable clarification: the connection between dance music and electronic music. (There's also the Electronic Dance article, but people are proposing merging it into electronic music altogether.)

What we have currently are Category:Dance music and Category:Electronic music, and some of the contents of the former almost certainly fits into the latter — house, techno, trance and the like are often bunched into the label of "dance music", but that isn't really a category that's been integrated under the genre system here. (See dance music and dance-pop, for example, which don't have genreboxes.) "Dance" is too broad a term because it encompasses some of electronic music and some of pop music. However, a lot of articles (such as those using Template:Album infobox, some instance of which I was responsible for) link to the dance music article when discussing electronic dance music, even though half of that article does not apply to electronic dance music.

What I'm proposing, basically, is a clear division between traditional dance music and electronic dance music, since they don't really connect to each other. Expand the article more on both sides, or split it altogether. Integrate items in Category:Dance music into Category:Electronic music. Meanwhile, I think the Electronic Dance article could be expanded so that it can be the primary article linked to in the context of electronic dance music.

Apologies if I'm not being too specific here. I'm not any kind of expert on the subjects in question, but I know enough to see that there is a clear distinction that needs to be addressed. –Unint 04:32, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

I wholly agree to this position. Rootless 12:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sparks

A request for a peer review of the Sparks article has been made here Wikipedia:Peer review/Sparks (band). Please have a look and maybe help it alongKaptKos 19:42, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] userbox

  • I created a userbox for this WikiProject, which you can add to your User Page. Feel free to edit the image that is displayed in it if you have a better one. Wickethewok 22:49, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:KLF

Just a heads up for you: The KLF is now a featured article, and WP:KLF has been set up to further improve articles about that band on Wikipedia. I'm sure we'd be happy to work as a sister or possibly a child Project; if that's an issue (i.e. if there's any possibility of "turf wars") please come to our talk page. In the meantime, we'll be busy working on articles :) --kingboyk 21:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

  • I for one, would be happy with your group as a child/sister project. Wickethewok 12:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I've invented a new term and put you down as a "friend project" :) --kingboyk 15:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crazy rantings by some guy

I have a question for music fans: are you aware that electronic music is not electronic dance music? Did you ever realize that no university in the USA regards electronic music and the music for dancing as the same genre? Are you aware that this is not a music magazine? Do you know the meaning of the term encyclopedic? Do you know the difference between idiomatic expressions, slang and encyclopedic (formal) language? Are you aware that most of articles claiming to deal with "electronic music subgenres" are unsourced or grounded only on independent websites?Brian W 23:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

  • No one has any idea what you are talking about. Wickethewok 20:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I know. This guy actually reminds me of Mark Peeters... conspiracy-like talk no one can't understand --84.193.167.210 23:11, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

And who is none? You and just less than a dozen Wikipedians, I suppose. Instead, I suggest you to try to answear to each question I posted above, otherwise you'll look just pathetic. Brian W 21:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I have no idea what you are talking about and have no desire to answer your questions. I have no idea what you are trying to prove and accomplish. Also, please stop posting this same message on people's talk pages. If you are having a specific problem with an article, discuss it there. Wickethewok 04:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • If indeed you'll stop your rants about this, I believe the answer to each of your questions is yes. Wickethewok 04:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Brian: (1) I'd love to see you give a citation for your claim that *no US university* ... etc. Are you referring strictly to Universities? ALL the teachers in ALL of them? How about colleges, music schools? I don't think you can backup that claim. Are you a 'purist'? Are you irritated by 'little people'?? (2) Let's suppose it's true that no university thinks 'electronic music' and 'techno' (common parlance:house/techno/trance/d'n'b, et. al) are the same thing. So what? Rock 'n' roll was around years before any high school bands were allowed to play any (sorry, you give your citation first); Jazz was around for decades before anyone would take it seriously, etc. Just because everyone working with 'techno' is not closeted away worrying about microsound, and granular, or whatever the latest academic in situ trend is, doesn't mean that the two are separate, except perhaps in the minds of academics who are PO'd because nobody's heard of them. Electronic music is: music made primarily with electronics. Maybe my Virus is not as heavy as your Moog coffin, if this is a penis thing. Twang 03:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Joe: I guess the guy was trying to make a distinction between electronic art music, like that of Varese or Stockhausen, versus electronic pop music, like that of BT or Kraftwerk. I guess it doesn't really matter... but maybe someone should come up with a way to differentiate between the two, so that someone reading about Stockhausen doesn't end up in some page about IDM. By the way, I'd like to see an article about the tape recorder as a musical instrument (that's how I ended up here). JoeMaffei 14 September 2006

More on the moron... (couldn't resist the alliteration) Maybe he meant that, since the distinction between subgenres of electronic music is so abstract, it's something that can't really be classified, so it can't be part of an encyclopedia. What he forgets is that this isn't an encyclopedia... this is Wikipedia. It's a new thing, baby, get used to it. Anonymous

Apologies for jumpiing in on an old discussion, but I'm a new member and hadn't read it before.

I respectfully disagree with whoever said that electronic music is unrelated to electronic dance music.

I frankly don't care that "no university" in the USA recognises electronic dance/pop music as being electronic music, but it is. IMO electronica owes far more to classical music than it does to rock music. To my mind, there is a direct line of evolution between the experimental electronic 'art' music of Stockhausen et al, and the upbeat techno-trance, IDM and so forth that makes up today's electronic 'pop' music. Electronic music is a broad category and should include both art music and pop music, because in many cases, there's a blurred line between the two. If it were up to me, I'd have the universities redefine what constitutes 'electronic music' so that it does incorporate electronic dance music and other forms of popular music that uses loops and samples.

Electronic (art) music is the same thing as electronic dance music; it evolved from precisely the same experiments and ideas. To deny this is to be elitist, but then I guess that's what they are. --Steve Farrell 22:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

No need to worry about that too much; the user who did say that has been banned indefinitely. Welcome to the project; let's hope the next major discussion will be under happier terms. –Unint 00:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Techno music/Hardcore dance music footers

The article on Gabber has been moved from Gabber music to Gabber. Could the techno music/Hardcore dance music footers be altered? Br, Brz7 11:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Done. Wickethewok 13:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks, br, Brz7 22:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good/featured article

  • I'd like to propose that we direct some of our efforts towards getting an electronic music article to "Good Article" and then "Featured Article" status. I think the hardest part of this will be locating reliable sources, so for those of you who have large back-catalogues of music magazines, you'd be a big help. I think it'd be easiest to start with either a well-known artist or group (rather than say, a specific genre) as it would be easier to find material on them. I would suggest either The Orb or Sasha, but of course I would like to hear other peoples' ideas. Wickethewok 13:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
  • C'mon folkses. Don't you guys wanna be put this group to some good use? Teamwork and all that. Remember, you get to choose whatever we work on. Wickethewok 19:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm all for it — not that I have access to anything like what you're talking about. I mean, look at how The KLF made it to FA: just two editors, but they have one fansite that exhastively collects everything available. Other artists, especially more recent phenomena, aren't so fortunate. I have a few pet projects I've been working on — though working entirely on online sources.
One thought, though — I'd like to see a recent electronic dance single make it to FA. I mean, here is a chance to document the cultural significance of such songs, which I think is lacking in the mainstream. Of course, that's exactly why it's also hard to find verifiable sources... –Unint 22:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Music Genres are very much undefined. Although there is some level of similarity throughout the largescale list of genres, basically they're going to be very hard to get defined. If there were some definitive source on music genres however, I would love to use it. I'd ultimately like to see some Electronica music genres as featured. Just to throw out some suggestions, we could use something like Trance or IDM to help the general population explain the difference between Techno and Electronica. FreeLance FoX 03:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I've been working heavily on Sasha. I have a good main body done, but if anyone wants to help they are of course welcome to! Wickethewok 22:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I stubled upon RoJaRo.com the other day. It's a database of magazine article subjects from music magazines, so you can search a band and see what magazines had ran articles on them. Could be a useful resource here. Pimlottc 20:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alexander Coe

  • Alexander Coe is up for peer review here if you guys would like to have some input. Wickethewok 04:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I'd really like some feedback on this especially regarding the completeness and conciseness of language of this article. Any and all help is greatly appreciated! Wickethewok 03:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia 1.0 Assessments

I've updated your project template to support (in the most basic fashion) Wikipedia 1.0 Assessments. If you want to use this system (and I think having looked at the bot-created Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The KLF articles by quality, Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The KLF articles by quality statistics and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The KLF articles by quality log you probably will!) I'm quite happy to help you get the template updated further to display an assessment, provide instructions, and transclude comments about the state of an article and what work it needs. If you want to go with this and need help either drop me a line on my talk page or post at Wikipedia 1.0 Assessments. --kingboyk 10:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The KLF discography

hi, just to inform you that the article The KLF discography is currently up for Featured List Candidacy. Please vote "support" or "object" with your comments at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/The KLF discography. cheers! Zzzzz 12:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fuck the Millennium

Hello, greetings again from WP:KLF. Fuck the Millennium is currently up for Featured Article Candidacy. Please vote "support" or "object" with your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fuck the Millennium. Over and out! --kingboyk 13:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review

WP:KLF have two articles up for peer review, and would appreciate your feedback.

[edit] All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song)

[edit] Whitney Joins The JAMs

--kingboyk 15:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dead?

Is this project inactive/dead? Sure seems to be! :( --kingboyk 22:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Not quite, king, but almost it seems. It was never that active in the first place though, at least not since I've been here. I always thought it was strange how few electronic music listening editors there are here, especially considering how present we are online. Keep up the nice KLF stuff, mate, I currently have Alexander Coe up at FAC right now btw. Cheers and what have you! Wickethewok 22:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
    • That's a shame. Maybe it will pick up. I've left a comment at the FAC about the article name - I think it ought to be Sasha (something or other) because that's what he's known as. --kingboyk 14:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • This project seems to be going nowhere. Perhaps mark it inactive or consider merging with another larger project? (WP Musicians perhaps?) --kingboyk 14:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Most editors in electronic music seem to edit more about their area of expertise, so there isn't much collaboration at the moment. I'm really surprised there isn't more material on Wikipedia regarding electronic music considering the large web presence of fans. In the future, I will attempt to provide a response in any peer reviews, FACs, feedback requests, etc.. that people post here. I would suggest that other editors who are currently following this project do the same, regardless of their interest in the specific article subject. Wickethewok 16:46, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] KLF

Fuck the Millennium is now a featured article (hooray!) but The KLF discography's featured list candidacy failed (hiss!).

Our next nomination for Featured Article is Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song), about the debut single released by the Justified Ancients of Mu Mu all the way back in 1987. Please have a look at the article and voice your opinion in the FAC. --kingboyk 09:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DJing

I added Category:DJing to the project; it certainly belongs here if Category:DJs does.

There should be an article describing what a DJ does: the whole point of DJing (creating a new whole out of ready-made tracks, creating a suitable atmosphere in the venue, maybe making people dance), basic DJing styles (playing tracks end-to-end and talking between them; playing tracks end-to-end cross-fading between them; beatmatching and making long mixes between tracks as done in electronic dance music; scratching), basic explanation of DJ techniques (now spread among a multitude of articles). I'm not sure it belongs to the disk jockey article, it seems to me that a new article (DJing?) is needed.

Oh, and I'm hereby volunteering to do parts of it. Rootless 12:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I think that would be a good idea. Maybe just start off with the "Techniques" section from Disc jockey and maybe expand it into an article called DJ techniques or something similar. I agree with you that there does need to be an article unifying the techniques you mentioned. Wickethewok 16:46, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
    • There's this thing about performance, affecting people's mood and building the set. It probably falls under Job description, but I don't know where to start and how to write it without sounding pathetic and maintain NPOV. Also, the job of radio DJs is probably different, and I don't really know what it is. Rootless 02:49, 21 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 21:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Synthesizers

I'm thinking of starting a new WikiProject to document notable synthesizers and their influence. If this is something that you'd be interested in helping with, please add your name to the proposal. --Mperry 23:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject boost

  • We need more active members at Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronic music. So please tell your friends who like electronic music and are willing to put in hours writing about it. If there are any suggestions for features for this Wikiproject I will help out with them and see what I can do. Please add any projects you are working on to the list - I will gladly help out with them as best I can. Since the original project founder has been MIA for 9 months or so, I'm declaring myself pseudo-king of this temporarily abandoned lot known as the talk page of this WikiProject. Basically, that probably means that I'm just going to do the most work directly related to member organization/cheerleading/WikiProject files/etc for now at least. For anyone who is reading this: PLEASE TELL YOUR WIKI AND REAL-LIFE FRIENDS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN ELECTRONIC MUSIC ABOUT THIS PROJECT! We need active members! Wickethewok 11:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think this project has been abandoned at all... People are still working on the categorization. Monni 11:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I understand that, but there is not much collaboration at the moment, which is the primary purpose of WikiProjects. That is, people don't really say what they are working on, thus allowing others to easily assist them and request help on articles. I, for one, would really like to help others get electronic music articles up to GA/FA levels.Wickethewok 19:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Well... I can't speak for others, but I did say when I joined what I'm going to work on and I haven't changed my mind. Monni 20:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I hope others mention what they are doing. Some participants have added their names to the participants list and went on doing their own thing, which is cool, but not really helpful in terms of collaboration. I think it'd be awesome to get an article like house music to FA, but something broad and major like that would probably take multiple highly-involved editors.Wickethewok 21:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Glad to hear from you again — I can't think of anyone better-suited for the job. Unfortunately, that's because I don't know anyone else, either on- or off-wiki, with the interest and enthusiasm to match (to say nothing of actual knowledge).
    • I suppose working on my own list niche topics is what I've been doing; I am not at the point where I could contemplate working on a topic as big as Sasha. Belated congratulations on that, by the way.
    • However! I'm also working on obtaining sources in print, which should be useful towards larger, more general-purpose articles. I have a few things on hand, but not sure when I'll get around to it. (I have also noticed at least one article where people have said that sources can't be found at all; ask me later, if this is a challenge anyone wants to work on.) –Unint 22:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Heya, Unint! Thanks, I'm glad I finally got my first FA. I agree that the general articles need work. I think I might try to tackle a couple of the more general subjects, too, like house music or trance music, which both are in dire need of sourcing/re-organization/etc. Getting a general-type article like that up to even a GA would be quite an accomplishment. Wickethewok 16:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Further on the subject of print sources: I've just discovered that WikiProject Computer and video games has started up an archive of magazine sources. Something to think about. –Unint 09:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
  • something i've come across lately that could be a killer article is Beats (music). hip-hop-centric at present, but has potential for a really good article on drum loops in general, imo. --Kaini 03:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Hmmm, I'm not sure about what the Beats article is supposed to be about exactly. I don't know too much about hip hop, so I'm not sure of the article's scope. Should it maybe be integrated into something like music loop or something? Wickethewok 16:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article tagging/rating

  • Feel free to use the parameters "class" (valid values: Stub, Start, B, GA, A, FA) and "importance" (valid values: Top, High, Mid, Low) when putting {{electronic-music-project}} on talk pages. As a general rule of thumb, I would say the major genres (house, techno, ambient, etc...) and similarly important core topics get Top importance, major artists, subgenres, labels, etc... get High importance, minor subgenres and not-as-important artists get Mid importance, and less important artists and obscure topics would get Low importance. When assigning articles ratings, ask yourself theoretical comparisons: is this as important to someone's understanding of electronic music as synthesizer (clearly a Top importanc article)? As important as DJ Tiesto (very influential, a clear High rating)? As important as Orbus Terrarum (album by influential artist, achieved some chart success, widely sold - seems like a Mid to me)? Or more like Gab Olivier (artist that meets WP:MUSIC, but no charting songs or last influence)? The ten-year test seems pretty applicable here for articles regarding active subjects (will anyone remember this subject ten years from now? will it have cultural significance to electronic music?). Anyways, these are all suggestions of course. The only rule for rating right now I think should be to use common sense. Also, for possibly controversial ratings, leave your brief reasoning in the relevant edit summary. If anyone else does or plans to do this sort of tagging, please leave your comments on how you rate articles in terms of importance to the WikiProject, as this seems like something that should be standardized. Wickethewok 08:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  • If, as it stands, even Kraftwerk only rates High... Can any artist ever qualify for Top? (I was also surprised by The Shamen's rating, but then I know almost nothing about them.) –Unint 21:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Under my proposed guidelines above, no artists would be rated as Top. Top would be reserved for broad articles, though having some of the key figures, like Kraftwerk, Brian Eno, etc... might be just as essential. I would have no objections if some really important artists were in the Top category. When I get a little break from school, hopefully I'll get a chance to maybe codify the above proposed guidelines, so that others can edit them easily to the point of consesus. Of course, anyone can go ahead and do that if they are so inclined. Wickethewok 22:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Fyi, I tidied up and fixed some bugs in the template. You can also use the shortcut {{WPEM}} instead of the longer {{electronic-music-project}}. I also added the term "priority", which seems better to use as "importance" and is used more prevalently by other WikiProjects, though importance is still accepted as a parameter. The categories, such as "low importance electronic music articles", should probably be "low priority..." instead as well. Anyways, so now on a low priority stub article, you could use {{WPEM |priority=low |class=stub}}, though you should still be able to use anything you used before as well. Wickethewok 07:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I think The Shamen should be at the top rating allowed by the project, and of course Kraftwerk must be. That said, wik's idea of having only overview articles as Top and everything else maxed out at High isn't a bad idea at all imho... --kingboyk 01:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Drum Club

Anyone fancy starting an article on the Drum Club? (fairly important duo and club night in the history of UK dance music). --kingboyk 17:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC) PS I'm currently not very active on Wikipedia, so if you could keep an eye on KLF articles it would be appreciated! In particular, preventing the addition of subpar material to the FAs is quite important.

Thank you Mr Wickethewok! I'm pretty sure it was also a club night, run by the same guys? --kingboyk 01:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New project

We've got some overlap with Wikipedia:WikiProject New Wave music. I think I will link us up, for a start. –Unint 05:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] footer template for garage related

should there be a footer template for garage related styles, akin to

Drum and bass
Clownstep - Darkcore - Darkstep - Drumfunk - Hardstep - Intelligent - Jazzstep - Jump-Up - Liquid funk - Techstep - Trancestep - Neurofunk
Other electronic music genres
Ambient | Breakbeat | Dance | Drum and bass | Electronica | Electronic Art Music | Hard Dance | Hardcore | House | Industrial | Synthpop | Techno | Trance

et al, containing (for example):

4x4 Garage | 2step | Dubstep | Garage | Grime | Speed Garage

Stevekeiretsu 00:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I notice that all but two of those are part of the main article, and grime, by the looks of it, is not entirely descended from garage. I'd suggest that there aren't so many articles that a navigational tool is needed. –Unint 23:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion nom notice

List of notable trance music records. Salvageable? –Unint 23:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Its a good idea for an article. Does anyone have a better definition for a good list of landmark records of trance music? Maybe like "List of influential trance music records" or something. Anyways, maybe a move to user space where it can be sourced and the list better defined/comprehensive is a good idea. Wickethewok 23:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I could probably make it one of my source-searching projects, but it would take far longer than the AfD would last, and I don't even have that kind of time right now. Also, from a cursory search I've mainly been able to find sources calling one track or another a "smash hit" or somesuch, but few that actually contextualize their popularity. –Unint 05:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I have tentatively set up a (heavily) trimmed version of the article (fully sourced and referenced) on my user space here (with talk page) which might serve as a starting point for improving the present article. In the meantime, I would appreciate if you could contribute to the AfD discussion, especially if you are an expert in the area. Including 2 inactive participants, the vote is presently 4 out of 6 is favour of deletion. CounterFX 14:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm undecided. Coming from a non-expert perspective, I think there's a need for information like this, due to the sprawling, unnavigatable market if nothing else. However, the fact that clubs are the main outlet of this stuff makes it particularly tricky to obtain a standard of verifiable information beyond word-of-mouth (hard to track down dance chart records or DJ publications, for instance). I'm also thinking that maybe this would work better as a narrative timeline with much more in-detail context; however, given the amount of published information that exists, is that even feasible? –Unint 18:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
  • The only 'authoritative' publication I've found so far is Ministry of Sound's Fifteen:50, which still has the problem of not formalising the criteria used to evaluate the tracks (DJ opinions, public polls, and so on). I agree that a narrative timeline which also explains the context of the tracks' success would be a better alternative; however, as you said, the published information on this is disappointingly sparse, and is often too informal to qualify for encyclopaedic referencing (for example, Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music). CounterFX 10:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Electronic Art Music : Copyrighted Material

Good article, except the entire thing is a copy and paste off of copyrighted Doctoral Dissertation. See my note ASAP! -asmadeus 03:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Orb FAC

  • Feel free to weigh in on The Orb's FAC HERE. I've put a bunch of work into this and would like to hear what others think. Wickethewok 23:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New article

You may like to know that The Elephant Table Album finally has an article. Totnesmartin 20:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I haven't heard of this before, but it sounds like a pretty cool album, I'll have to check it out sometime. Wickethewok 21:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
For me personally it was a formative experience - the music I do now is still influenced by the spirit of that album. Totnesmartin 14:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Heya, everyone! I'm a new wikipedia editor, but I'm learning very quickly. I listen to many genres of EDM, but mostly Drum n Bass and Breaks. I would very much like to help improve articles in these categories. I added my username to the list of participants in the wikiproject, and I added the userbox to my user page. Thank you for providing a centralized place to organize efforts in this area! nrwilk talk 17:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Welcome! If you have any questions or need advice on anything, don't hesitate to ask. Cheers! Wickethewok 17:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_Electronic_music_d8f7.html"