MrMoustacheMM (talk | contribs) →Your recent edits: new section |
MrMoustacheMM (talk | contribs) |
||
(11 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
*Do not remove [[WP:RS|reliably sourced]] reviews from [[Template:Album ratings]] without a good reason, which should first be discussed on the article's talk page. |
*Do not remove [[WP:RS|reliably sourced]] reviews from [[Template:Album ratings]] without a good reason, which should first be discussed on the article's talk page. |
||
Thank you. [[User:MrMoustacheMM|MrMoustacheMM]] ([[User talk:MrMoustacheMM|talk]]) 16:46, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you. [[User:MrMoustacheMM|MrMoustacheMM]] ([[User talk:MrMoustacheMM|talk]]) 16:46, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
||
:Hi, thank you for your message and thank you for letting me know why you reverted me rather than just reverting me. |
|||
:I have made some changes since I am here to explain why (and please excuse the poor wording) I have removed acoustic from the genres on Damnation as acoustic is Not a genre but a style. And why should Ghost Reveries be labeled progressive rock but blackwater park still life deliverance are not when they are all of a similar style. And heritage is not progressive metal I know it is referenced but if you check out the reference you will see that site also list the album as pop/rock so they can't be a trusted source on this case. [[User:Lukejordan02|Lukejordan02]] ([[User talk:Lukejordan02|talk]]) 17:27, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
|||
::(Please keep your reply here, per my talk page guidelines; it's much easier to keep a discussion going in one place, rather than jumping back and forth between talk pages. Thanks.) |
|||
::Again, you shouldn't remove genres if there is a note saying not to do so without discussion. If you disagree, ''discuss why first'' and wait until [[WP:CONSENSUS|consensus]] ''agrees'' before removing. This needs to be done on the talk page of each article you wish to change the genres on. I'm again reverting your removal of these genres. |
|||
::I looked through the entire Allmusic review on ''Heritage'', and nowhere does the author call them "Pop/Rock". Yes, it says that in the sidebar, but since the sidebar is ''never'' considered [[WP:RS|reliable]] for genres, pointing there as a reason why Allmusic isn't reliable is not valid. Per [[WP:ALBUM/SOURCES]], Allmusic is a reliable source, and removing it and the genres it sources is improper. |
|||
::I will reiterate: You need to ''discuss'' your desired changes ''on the talk pages of these articles'' before making these changes. Also, if another editor disagrees with you, do not just re-make your edits; wait until the discussion is finished first. This is part of a process called [[WP:BRD]], meaning "Bold, Revert, Discuss", in which you make a bold edit (or several, in this case), I reverted them, and so now we discuss these edits. Thanks. [[User:MrMoustacheMM|MrMoustacheMM]] ([[User talk:MrMoustacheMM|talk]]) 17:44, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Fair enough but can you help me to talk it through and it the right place, I don't want to get into an argue,net with you as I know you are a good editor. |
|||
*1 - why should a reviews option be aloud as fact just because a reviewer refers to it as progressive doesn't mean it is. |
|||
*2 - Acoustic is not a genre and there shouldn't need to be a discussion if it is outright wrong (if someone put electric on every electric album it would be removed without discussion) |
|||
*3 - why should some albums have progressive rock aswell as progressive death metal but others don't when they are all of a similar style. |
|||
Thank you. [[User:Lukejordan02|Lukejordan02]] ([[User talk:Lukejordan02#top|talk]]) 17:50, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:*1. On Wikipedia, we rely on what [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] say. We can't just add or remove info based on our own opinions; that is considered [[WP:OR|original research]]. Information must be [[WP:V|verifiable]], otherwise anyone could post whatever they wanted, and who knows if it's true or not? (As a silly example, I could post that ''Heritage'' is a mix of [[hardcore punk]], [[East coast rap]], and [[country music]]; without a source confirming this, who knows if it's true or not?) We go with what genres reliable reviewers call these albums, because we need ''some'' sort of standard for genres. |
|||
:*2. I don't recall reverting any edit of yours calling "acoustic" a genre, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there. That being said, I agree, "acoustic" is not a genre of music. |
|||
:*3. It's because these articles went from being collections of random crap that every Opeth fan decided to add, regardless of sourcing and verifiability, to being somewhat cleaned up by a handful of dedicated editors. At the time, the idea was to get the genres locked down to a couple, based on [[Opeth|the band's article]], instead of [[jazzy blackened death/doom metal]] or whatever. It's true that some are unsourced, and that they are inconsistent from album to album. There was so much cleanup needed, that some stuff just fell through the cracks. This is why ''discussion'' is needed: to find out, based on reliable sources, what genre(s) each album is. But one editor changing/adding/removing unsourced, undiscussed genres is not helping any. |
|||
:I suggest clicking on the links I've given above, to better understand Wikipedia policy on sourcing. Additionally, the following links may prove useful to you: [[WP:ALBUM]], [[WP:MOSALBUM]], and [[WP:ALBUM/SOURCES]]. Take a look through those; they are great resources for editing album articles. [[User:MrMoustacheMM|MrMoustacheMM]] ([[User talk:MrMoustacheMM|talk]]) 18:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Hi, I may be blind but where in that review for heritage does it say it is a Progressive Metal album? [[User:Lukejordan02|Lukejordan02]] ([[User talk:Lukejordan02#top|talk]]) 19:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:"it melds progressive metal to prog rock". |
|||
:Undid your removal at ''Ghost Reveries'', no discussion, not what the source on ''Watershed'' says. ''Start a discussion on the article's talk page'' and wait until a consensus is reached ''before'' making your edit. [[User:MrMoustacheMM|MrMoustacheMM]] ([[User talk:MrMoustacheMM|talk]]) 19:18, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
|||
On the Watershed album page it says "The album has been described as "a major turning point" for Opeth due to the depth of its engagement with progressive rock".<ref name=Popmatters /> so if that is true then Ghost Reveries shouldn't really be labelled a progressive rock album and I have started a discussion on the talk page. Kind regards. [[User:Lukejordan02|Lukejordan02]] ([[User talk:Lukejordan02#top|talk]]) 19:22, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:Alright, I'll reply on [[Talk:Ghost Reveries]]. Make sure you don't make your edits until the discussion has reached [[WP:CONSENSUS|consensus]]. [[User:MrMoustacheMM|MrMoustacheMM]] ([[User talk:MrMoustacheMM|talk]]) 19:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:25, 1 June 2014
Welcome! As far as I could notice, nobody gave you any rules or welcomes
|
Your recent edits
Hi. I have undone the edits you recently made to various Opeth albums, for the following reasons:
- There is no need to split track listings into multiples if not necessary. Just because some tracks are bonus does not automatically mean they should be split. Calling out the bonus tracks in the note parameter is perfectly acceptable, per Template:Track listing. Additionally, it is rarely necessary to collapse multiple track listings, unless there are a lot of them, or some are redundant, or they are exceptionally long.
- Do not remove tags like Template:Refimprove without actually increasing the number of references in that article/section. If you think there are enough references already there, then start a discussion on the article's talk page explaining why you think it does not belong there, and wait until consensus agrees before removing it.
- Do not remove or change genres, especially sourced genres, without first discussing it, especially if there are notes sitting all around the genres saying not to remove them without discussion.
- Do not remove reliably sourced reviews from Template:Album ratings without a good reason, which should first be discussed on the article's talk page.
Thank you. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 16:46, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi, thank you for your message and thank you for letting me know why you reverted me rather than just reverting me.
- I have made some changes since I am here to explain why (and please excuse the poor wording) I have removed acoustic from the genres on Damnation as acoustic is Not a genre but a style. And why should Ghost Reveries be labeled progressive rock but blackwater park still life deliverance are not when they are all of a similar style. And heritage is not progressive metal I know it is referenced but if you check out the reference you will see that site also list the album as pop/rock so they can't be a trusted source on this case. Lukejordan02 (talk) 17:27, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- (Please keep your reply here, per my talk page guidelines; it's much easier to keep a discussion going in one place, rather than jumping back and forth between talk pages. Thanks.)
- Again, you shouldn't remove genres if there is a note saying not to do so without discussion. If you disagree, discuss why first and wait until consensus agrees before removing. This needs to be done on the talk page of each article you wish to change the genres on. I'm again reverting your removal of these genres.
- I looked through the entire Allmusic review on Heritage, and nowhere does the author call them "Pop/Rock". Yes, it says that in the sidebar, but since the sidebar is never considered reliable for genres, pointing there as a reason why Allmusic isn't reliable is not valid. Per WP:ALBUM/SOURCES, Allmusic is a reliable source, and removing it and the genres it sources is improper.
- I will reiterate: You need to discuss your desired changes on the talk pages of these articles before making these changes. Also, if another editor disagrees with you, do not just re-make your edits; wait until the discussion is finished first. This is part of a process called WP:BRD, meaning "Bold, Revert, Discuss", in which you make a bold edit (or several, in this case), I reverted them, and so now we discuss these edits. Thanks. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 17:44, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough but can you help me to talk it through and it the right place, I don't want to get into an argue,net with you as I know you are a good editor.
- 1 - why should a reviews option be aloud as fact just because a reviewer refers to it as progressive doesn't mean it is.
- 2 - Acoustic is not a genre and there shouldn't need to be a discussion if it is outright wrong (if someone put electric on every electric album it would be removed without discussion)
- 3 - why should some albums have progressive rock aswell as progressive death metal but others don't when they are all of a similar style.
Thank you. Lukejordan02 (talk) 17:50, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- 1. On Wikipedia, we rely on what reliable sources say. We can't just add or remove info based on our own opinions; that is considered original research. Information must be verifiable, otherwise anyone could post whatever they wanted, and who knows if it's true or not? (As a silly example, I could post that Heritage is a mix of hardcore punk, East coast rap, and country music; without a source confirming this, who knows if it's true or not?) We go with what genres reliable reviewers call these albums, because we need some sort of standard for genres.
- 2. I don't recall reverting any edit of yours calling "acoustic" a genre, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there. That being said, I agree, "acoustic" is not a genre of music.
- 3. It's because these articles went from being collections of random crap that every Opeth fan decided to add, regardless of sourcing and verifiability, to being somewhat cleaned up by a handful of dedicated editors. At the time, the idea was to get the genres locked down to a couple, based on the band's article, instead of jazzy blackened death/doom metal or whatever. It's true that some are unsourced, and that they are inconsistent from album to album. There was so much cleanup needed, that some stuff just fell through the cracks. This is why discussion is needed: to find out, based on reliable sources, what genre(s) each album is. But one editor changing/adding/removing unsourced, undiscussed genres is not helping any.
- I suggest clicking on the links I've given above, to better understand Wikipedia policy on sourcing. Additionally, the following links may prove useful to you: WP:ALBUM, WP:MOSALBUM, and WP:ALBUM/SOURCES. Take a look through those; they are great resources for editing album articles. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 18:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I may be blind but where in that review for heritage does it say it is a Progressive Metal album? Lukejordan02 (talk) 19:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- "it melds progressive metal to prog rock".
- Undid your removal at Ghost Reveries, no discussion, not what the source on Watershed says. Start a discussion on the article's talk page and wait until a consensus is reached before making your edit. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 19:18, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
On the Watershed album page it says "The album has been described as "a major turning point" for Opeth due to the depth of its engagement with progressive rock".[1] so if that is true then Ghost Reveries shouldn't really be labelled a progressive rock album and I have started a discussion on the talk page. Kind regards. Lukejordan02 (talk) 19:22, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- Alright, I'll reply on Talk:Ghost Reveries. Make sure you don't make your edits until the discussion has reached consensus. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 19:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)