Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alternative music

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the discussion page of the Alternative music WikiProject!

Contents
Archives

To start a new discussion section, please click here

[edit] Collaboration of the Week

The current Alternative music collaboration of the week is
''I Should Coco''
Vote for the next collaboration here.

[edit] Linkin Park, again

Per the discussion here, I feel this topic needs to be brought up again and decisively dealt with. While consensus in a previous discussion here was that they aren't alternative rock, every time I tried to broach the topic on a Linkin Park article talk page the discussion never realy panned out. Some Linkin Park articles still list alt-rock as a genre. So please, add your two cents to the discussion (I will also be posting links to this talk page on relevant article talk page in order to centralize the discussion here). WesleyDodds (talk) 06:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Linkin Park os Nu Metal (which I understand is the same as Rap Rock?). They aren't influenced by punk or any of the other influences that are common among alternative bands, so I would say no, they aren't alt-rock. Then again, they seem to be inspired by bands like RATM who are alt-rock, so I'm not sure. indopug (talk) 08:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Rap rock =/= nu metal; for instance, SOAD and Breaking Benjamin are nu metal bands that have nothing to do with rap rock. I'm not really sure why we're having this discussion; numerous sources have included LP in the alt-rock genre, whether or not that's what they actually are is not up for us to decide. Parsecboy (talk) 12:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I really haven't seen any reliable sources that categorize Linkin Park as alternative rock. They are consistently categorized as a nu metal band, and that should be sufficient. Additionally, some of the arguments I've read on talk pages are pretty flimsy. This argument is based solely on personal POV (with an attempt to reference the Linkin Park wiki article to boot). One argument I read on the Linkin Park talk page a while ago was that since they charted on the "Alternative/Modern Rock" charts they are thus alternative rock, which ignores the fact that a lot of non-alternative bands have charted on that same chart (including Metallica, of all bands). The sources used to cite the genre in the main article's infobox are just poor. And a lot of arguments for including alternative rock center around a pereived change of style on Minutes to Midnight, which while probably accurate that they changed their style, doesn't mean they are suddenly alt-rock. WesleyDodds (talk) 19:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
SOAD have included rap elements, but in genre terms are somewhat "broad spectrum". Our article on Breaking Benjamin doesn't describe them in nu metal terms at all, but as post-grunge/alt rock/metal. So neither of those seem like useful counterexamples. Though this is all something of an aside as regards the original question... Alai (talk) 15:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Linkin Park is a alternative rock band. Have you heard songs like In Between and Valentine's Day that's what you call alternative rock. --Freedom (song) (talk) 19:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

That's not a good enough rationale under Wikipedia verifiability guidelines. Also, alternative rock is very broad, and is partly defined by its connections to underground music scenes. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Album articles in need of expansion

After realizing that the article for Murmur was not only less than 10kb but was shorter than the article for "Radio Free Europe", I undertook some emergency expansion (even though it's nowhere near my favorite R.E.M. album). Some of our High-Importance articles could use any sort of expansion. Here's a list of all the High-Importance album articles under 10kb:

Integrating album reviews is one of the easiest tasks. All of these albums have been discusssed at length in the music press, so sources shouldn't be too hard to find. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Work on Disintegration will begin soon, Wesley. Don't worry. :) NSR77 TC 01:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Radio Free Europe

Question: what does everyone think of there being two infoboxes for "Radio Free Europe"? This is the legacy of there originally being two different pages for the two different single releases of the song until I merged them almost a year ago. I've considered condensing them down into one infobox, but then again they refer to two separate versions of the same song, released on separate record labels with distinct B-sides (by the way, I have the resources to turn this page into a Featured Article, but I've been hesitant to start work on it). WesleyDodds (talk) 09:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Song articles with two infoboxes would nearly always work better as separate articles so, in this case, merge everything into one infobox. List both covers, release dates, b-sides in that infobox. How do you plan to do the recording section? Discuss both versions under one section, or work completely chronologically having the Recording of the IRS version after the Release of the Hib-Tone? indopug (talk) 11:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
The Hib-Tone version didn't chart, so it'd be a matter of covering the original recording and critical reception, then going to the I.R.S. recording. Given that most of the documented contemporary acclaim has been for the original version, and that there are different versions of the song, this will create an unusual structure for this article. I envision something like:
  • Origins and recording (recording of original Hib Tone version, that is)
  • Composition (it's the same song structurally; the main difference is that the Hib Tone version is faster and sloppier, and both versions have different intros)
  • Reception
  • I.R.S. re-recording (this version is the version on Murmur and the one most people hear; it's also the one that charted and had a video)
  • Music video
That should work, I hope. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

The current layout is way too confusing. Condense it into one infobox and then discuss the discrepancies where appropriate. NSR77 TC 21:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dinosaur Jr<period> redux

I have confirmation from Dinosar Jr. management that there *should* be a period after the name of the band. She (Amy Abrams) stated this in the band discussion page but after the "voting" took place. I would like this reconsidered and changed given the fact that the band itself wants it that way. Arleach (talk) 05:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

That's odd because I thought the band made it clear that there was no period (thinking of Our Band Could Be Your Life here). WesleyDodds (talk) 05:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
here's the email. She made the same comment on Talk:Dinosaur Jr

"Begin forwarded message:

From: Amy Abrams <amy@bleemusic.com> Date: May 16, 2008 15:06:53 CDT To: "Tom Meyer" <tmeyer1969@gmail.com> Subject: Re: photo for wikipedia

yes, that seems correct. Thanks for keeping up the wikipedia - I try to stay out of it unless something is just flat out wrong. I missed out on the vote about the period, which is a bummer, because it has been determined by the band that the period belongs there and we've been trying to be consistent with its use. oh well... Thanks again for your help.

Amy Abrams Bleemusic, Inc.


Arleach (talk) 06:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

while I see no reason to doubt this, per Wikipedia guidelines, we can only change it if we have proof via a reliable secondary source for verifiability: ie. an interview. If the band members say "Yeah, there's supposed to be a period at the end of 'Jr'" in an interview, that's all we need, but nevertheless we need a published source to cite. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
At the talk page discussion (just after the vote), a user points that there is no dot on the official website. Looking at it now though... indopug (talk) 07:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
yes, the giant text on the front page of the website has a period, and the title bar of your browser, as does the copyright statement. Not sure what else you need as this is all 'published'. I'll be happy to get a quote from one of them but they are in Europe. Arleach (talk) 14:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I say change it. Ms. Abrams too seems to suggest that they've put the dot there kinda recently (after Our Band was out anyway). indopug (talk) 17:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
It's better to have a quote from the band comfirming there's a period, because so far sources explicitly say there isn't one, so we can't rely just on the formatting of the name at the band's website. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
well that's rather ridiculous. "sources" are the band's management. and the website. and the album covers. Arleach (talk) 00:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, but it's really not verifiable until it is documented by a published source. Otherwise it's original research, and someone can undo the changes by claiming another published source. We can't cite an e-mail to a Wiki editor, because there's no secondary documentation to verify it. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
but the "secondary documentation" (or primary, really) is the website and the album covers. doesn't 'original research' imply that someone could just be making something up or offering opinion ? how else is it supposed to be documented ? Is some interviewer supposed to ask "So, J, period or no period ?" Arleach (talk) 05:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, pretty much. It erases any doubt. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
but again, how does having it on the web page and on the CD covers not erase any doubt ? Arleach (talk) 05:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Do all the CDs have the period? I don't think they do. The main point that needs to be addressed is that in Our Band Could Be Your Life, Michael Azerrad notes there's supposed to be no period after the "Jr". We need something clear that refutes that that we can source. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FA trends

Here's a secret: a lot of my more intensive editing as part of the WikiProject is the result of me looking at the FA and GA lists every day and asking myself, "What areas need to improved?" I typically judge this according the number of FAs/GAs divided by criteria such as bands, albums, songs, alt-rock subgenres, decades, and so on. So I thought I'd just point out some trends I've noticed. For the sake of (my own) sanity, I'll just focus on FAs.

Yes, I'm bored and filled with idle curiosity. Why do you ask? WesleyDodds (talk) 11:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Dude... indopug (talk) 11:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Hahaha. NSR77 TC 04:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
It seems the conclusion to be drawn here is that Powderfinger are the best band in the alt-rock universe? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 04:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
...or that I have too much time on my hands. Your pick. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 04:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Everyone knows the best band in the alt-rock universe is Dogstar, the vanity band formed by Keanu "Whoa!" Reeves! WesleyDodds (talk) 05:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Point taken. Begs the question of why they aren't noted on the above list. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 05:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Supergrass taskforce

Hi

I've created a Supergrass taskforce page now. Please join if you can help out with Supergrass articles.

Thanks

--TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 13:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pearl Jam articles

I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed, but User:-5- has put in a lot of hard work into Pearl Jam-related articles. -5- has done so much work that it wouldn't take much to turn several of them into Good Articles. This has happened: both Ten and Vitalogy were project collaborations, and both are now GAs. I implore anyone knowledgeable about or interested in the group to help out, and maybe we could bring a whole swath of these articles to GA or even FA status rather soon. In particular, I ask that those who have experience with discography pages take a look at Pearl Jam discography. Could this be a Featured List? WesleyDodds (talk) 07:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The discography is nearly there. Just a matter of reordering the charts alphabetically (which is more painful than it sounds). I don't think those Xmas singles can be listed though, since they aren't official wide-release things. Another thing I'm not sure about is the Notes column in the Music videos. I'll try to fine-tune the whole thing tomorrow. How about something like a PJ collaboration of the month or something of that sort? We could push for a big juicy high-importance featured topic. indopug (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
It's a little overwhelming. Too many charts are there. The only thing that comes to mind is...overwhelming. NSR77 TC 01:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Just be glad that all the live albums are listed in a daughter article. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I'll remove a few charts from each of the tables. A "comprehensive" discography lists all the releases, not necessarily all the charts. indopug (talk) 06:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stereolab picture

Commons decided to delete the one and only free picture of Stereolab the band that seems to be available, and thus, this FA is left without one. They next roll by my area in the fall, so until then I can't take one myself. I've emailed a couple people on the Internet who've posted their own pics online, to no avail. If anyone has some stashed somewhere or can ask a friend with concert pics to donate one, that would be great. - Merzbow (talk) 03:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

That sucks; I really liked that picture. You might want to try e-mailing Too Pure or the band itself. Belle & Sebastian and The Wedding Present are two bands that have allowed Wikipedia to use professional pics. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Last time I emailed a band for permission (My Dying Bride), the band did give permission, but the extremely anal bureaucrat I communicated with at Commons said that even an email from them explicitly saying so was not enough. So I suppose I'll email the band and ask if they can just upload a picture themselves at Commons; the wizard is simple enough. - Merzbow (talk) 07:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the problem would be that probably the band themselves don't necessarily own the picture, the photographer or record label generally does. So the band may not have the rights to release it on creative commons at all. indopug (talk) 09:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
So yeah, if possible, ask the label. You would probably get better results. Someone working for Perry Farrell told me (long story) that if we wanted to get a Commons-licensed picture, it would be best to contact Warner Bros. since they are in charge of promotional material for his previous bands. Then again, if you ask the band directly for a picture, all they might have to do to provide you with one is set up a camera on a timer, say "Cheese!", and upload it.WesleyDodds (talk) 10:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Flickr's usable pics are less than satisfactory, but better than nothing. indopug (talk) 14:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Ahh thanks I didn't realize Flickr was a valid source. I'll choose an image from there until a better one can be found. - Merzbow (talk) 03:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
You need to make sure the picture you take from Flickr has the right licence to be used. They need to be tagged with a creative commons licence, see here. --JD554 (talk) 06:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
The link I provided contains only pictures that have licenses compatible to be uploaded to Wiki-Commons. (Flickr provides a search filter that gives Commons-compatible pics) indopug (talk) 06:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Good news everyone; I just undeleted the image; commons:Image:Stereolab live.jpg. I'm not sure what language its description is in... if someone does, could you tell me please (and translate, if possible). dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 06:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It's Spanish. Unfortunately I can't translate Spanish. Also (as far as the image information is concerned) he took the picture himself, which makes me wonder what other information it needs so it isn't deleted again. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
That should be enough...it was tagged by an IP and then deleted during a mass run through the no source categories...many a mistake is missed there. It's now on my watchlist and won't be deleted again (and I'm happy to look into any other commons issues you have). dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 07:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Ahh thanks. I also wonder why it was deleted. Unless somebody had proof the original uploader was a liar, it should never have happened. I need to log into Commons more often and check my watchlist there. - Merzbow (talk) 07:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm more suspicious. Its a low-res pic, there's no camera info and the uploader doesn't have a great record going by his talk-page. indopug (talk) 07:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Supergrass discography

I've made a lot of changes to the Supergrass discography page and have nominated it for featured list. Please leave comments.

One thing I shouldn't have done was request a peer review before I submitted the discography for FL.

--TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 15:38, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Paramore

Paramore is an alternative rock band right found many sources but people keep rejecting it. --Freedom (song) (talk) 19:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

From recent diffs to the article, they all seem to be self-published sources, or just not reliable. CloudNine (talk) 21:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wilco on the Main Page

Wilco will be Today's Featured Article on June 8th. Keep your eyes peeled! WesleyDodds (talk) 07:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

  • You will each be issued a nightstick in case you have to police any disgruntled Son Volt fans ;) Teemu08 (talk) 20:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I've watchlisted, good work Teemu! dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] News

How come the News section on the Portal stopped being updated? --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 08:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Because I got lazy and distracted. I'll try and update it soon. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Soft Boys - Underwater Moonlight

I added Underwater Moonlight to 1980 breakthrough albums because it's been cited by REM, the Replacements, Camper Van Beethoven, and the Smiths as a major influence. It was removed from the list though so if you don't want me to put it back let me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgodd (talk • contribs) 23:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Probably silly question

Any chance I can get the newsletter without actually being a member? :) I'd probably feel compelled to contribute if I actually added myself to the project, and I really a) don't think I'd be of much help and b) don't have enough time to try. Thanks, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 03:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

You can add yourself to the member list and not watchlist this page. :) I could try and add you to the delivery list, but no promises on my remembering/forgetting! And of course, everyone is helpful to the project... so join! ;) giggy (:O) 03:07, 14 June 2008 (UTC)