Music:Proposed policies/archive

Self Titled Albums
What should be the correct form of titling album pages for self titled albums? perhaps, Artist:Self Titled Paul Lynch 17:47, 21 Oct 2005 (UTC)

My lot would be thrown in with Artist (album), with Artist as the standard code for that, so that way, it'll just come up as Artist so, we know that's the record.

(i.e. The Beatles recorded The Beatles, a/k/a The White Album) Rev. Syung Myung Me 05:37, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Votes
Now, Can I get you guys' votes on these issues?(you could vote in a similar fashion that I write my vote): once an issue is decided, we will cross out the text.

*add to templates(removes the edit links to the right of each section) Yes- Paul Lynch 09:13, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes- Michael Ardaiolo 15:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes, particularly if we're happy with how it looks now (also, will this remove the templates from the Category pages? Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:16, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) *make the format for self titled albums Artist:album Yes- Paul Lynch 09:13, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes- Michael Ardaiolo 15:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes - Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:16, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)  *Consolidate EP, Single, Lp, and Soundtrack into Album, OR have EP, Single, Lp, and Soundtrack as subcategories, and put both Album and another applicable category tag on each album page Yes- subcategories with 2 tags per page- Paul Lynch 09:13, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes- subecategoriesMichael Ardaiolo 15:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Subcategories for me - Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:16, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)  *Erase all blank pages for the time being(including Artist pages by letter) Yes- Paul Lynch 09:13, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes- Michael Ardaiolo 15:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes (speaking of which, once you do that, I might Pop in and make "M" an actual artist page -- the current link is to "M (Robin Scott)", but "M" would be a little cleaner. Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:16, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Maybe- What happens when people start editing pages, etc?  A section for written and editied signitures?  Is this necessary?Michael Ardaiolo 15:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) This one I could go either way on; with the Mix CD ones, the Parent Mix CD is signed, so people can figure that who created the disc wrote the notes; on the other hand, though, I'm a little curious as to right now how the same-song-multiple-mixes will work.  I'm thinking perhaps a note before, so it'd be "MIX 1:  Blah blah blah      MIX 2: blah blah blah".  But I don't know yet.  Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:16, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes- Paul Lynch 10:54, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes- Paul Lynch 09:13, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) No Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:16, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes to giving each song/album it own review page; maybe written as Artist:Album and Artist:Album:Song respectively, because there are bound to be numerous repeated album titles and song titles, so it might be best to go ahead and make this uniform for everything.- Michael Ardaiolo 15:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Sign all NPOV entries (mainly reviews, but also Song Notes that are not neutral, and possibly any biographies that are not neutral)
 * Put album reviews and song notes on discussion pages instead of on actual page (an alternative might be to have a Review category and give each song and album its own review page)
 * It seems to me that's exactly what the article pages should be for, particularly for song/albums. Discussion is more for "is this right?" type stuff.  If we move them off, no one will check them.  So that's a strong "no" from me.  Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:16, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Maybe only do "Artist:Album" when there's a conflict? I think for the most part, we should be OK, but there are a few repeated album titles; I'm thinking with that case, it'd just be whichever one is put in first gets the album title, any other ones get "Artist:Album". In this case, maybe put in a line saying "Do you mean Artist:Album?" at the top of one of these types of conflicting ones.

That might be a more elegant solution with the Mix CD Song Section (than just the different sections of the pages), although I like the idea of not having separate remix pages; so, say, if I put an album mix of something on a Mix CD, and you put a dance remix on a different Mix CD, both links should go to the same Song Page, with a little comment on the mix CD line as to which mix you used (i.e., what I did for It's a New Find or The Guitar (The Lion Sleeps Tonight). Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:41, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Yes- Paul Lynch 09:41, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes with a few minor changes.- Michael Ardaiolo 15:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes; perhaps put the "subst:song"/etc. notes at the top of the category page, in the about section? Yes- Paul Lynch 10:24, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes- Michael Ardaiolo 15:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:16, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Remove Pages "Artist Template" "Label Template" and the like, since there is "Template:Artist" and "Template:Label", or possibly move them to the template discussion pages
 * Move old Artist and Label pages to Request an Artist and Request a Label, respectively- this can be used to keep track of labels and artists that dont have pages (or any links to their pages)

reviews
I've noticed that a lot of artist and album pages just have Michael's reviews on them, and this may be confusing when trying to see if a page is empty of not. What do you guys think about making a seperate review page for each album, like Review:Album (we could also make a review category)- and on the review page, it will be all the reviews (if there are multiple ones) on one page, maybe with seperate titles to each review? Another possible route would be to put reviews on the discussion page of the album page, which would require less work, and less pages. Also, on a related note, if songs lyrics are ever put on this wiki (I don't know about copyright yet and it's definately not a priority) would it be better to put it on the song's page, or to have a seperate category and name the pages Lyrics:Song? Paul Lynch 10:13, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, I think it's actually a really good idea to have it like that. Particularly with Albums/Songs, maybe less so with Artists. I am pretty much against using the Discussion pages, though -- discussion pages are typically more for housekeeping and comments, not for actual content -- very few people would check them, and I think if we did that, we'd run the risk of this being more of an encyclopedia (which isn't a bad thing, just that there's WikiPedia), and less of content that makes it unique (reviews; stuff like that). What I'd probably recommend doing (haven't checked, and I think it might be like this already) is on the artist page, just linking items of the discography, and putting the reviews on there. (OK, I just looked at a random artist page -- turned out to be ...And You Will Know Us By The Trail of Dead. For me, what I'd recommend doing, is actually breaking off the "madonna", "worlds apart single" and "worlds apart album" stuff into their own pages, and then the Trail of Dead page would just have:

DISCOGRAPHY:
 * Madonna (album)
 * Worlds Apart (Single)
 * Worlds Apart

and those links would all go to the reviews. With a wiki, the strength is actually having more pages than less, just because, well, they're small and they're specialized. A wiki is more about loads of things interlocking in cool and unique ways, and I think we should embrace that with the album/artist reviews. (Also, linking to discussion pages in reviews and whatnot, if we want to say, say that "This album reminds me of Worlds Apart", in this version, we'd just go "This album reminds me of Worlds Apart", where in the other version, we'd have to go "This album reminds me of Worlds Apart", which just isn't really terribly intuitive.

If we go the lyrics route, a Lyrics:Foo style would probably work -- it might be interesting to look at the TMBG Wiki to see how they handle that sort of thing. Just my 2 cents. Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:25, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

i agree. Michael Ardaiolo 16:34, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of which -- is this what the "Album Review" section of the Template:Artist is for? Because if it is, we could probably pull that out of the template. (BTW, good cleanup jobs on that one and Template:Label.) Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:37, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

sign all your posts! just put 4 tildas ~ after what you write. Ok, I will take Album Review off the artist template, and move album reviews to the album template, song reviews to the song template, and artist biographies can serve as reviews- also (this is how they do it on the TMBG wiki) any biographies or reviews should be signed (just 3 tildas, no date), either with your wiki user name, or with your real name(without a link). Any further discussion on the templates(which are looking really good right now) can be done on the discussion pages for the templates, right? Paul Lynch 17:27, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Makes sense to me! I'm also going through and cleaning up the The band names; I'm making all the "The Foos" links redirects to just "Foos", so they'll alphabetize correctly. Rev. Syung Myung Me 17:29, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

That does make more sense than "The Foos" having the main page. Having things in A-Z order will be really good.

awesome
Thats a good format you're using to do the song pages now, Revme- just be sure to add a link to the album page, too. Paul Lynch 18:09, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

The MP3 Thing
I'm of two minds of including the mp3 links; I did because this mix was an MP3-based mix, so it might be good to have the option of downloading/seeing the original notes (I've made a few changes to the versions here, even aside from formatting issues). I don't even know if all of the links are live/how long they will remain live. So on that side, there's the "Eh, if it's available, that makes sense". On the other hand, it might leave us open to a bit of trouble -- perhaps there should be something on the Decisions page on a Remove/not Remove thing. Rev. Syung Myung Me 18:35, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

OK -- I came around to the "Feelin' Real Weird About It" side, and nuked the links on those pages. So, yeah -- I figure that's probably safer. - Rev. Syung Myung Me 05:42, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Labels
I am unsure what to do with the rosters of labels. It's hard to simply have an active and inactive roster list. Many artist release albums on multiple labels, but are still considered active on all of them. Also, labeling inactive as 'a list of bands no longer recording under the label' is misleading to me. When I think 'inactive,' I think disbanded. I was considering having lists for Active, Past and Disbanded, but then again, a lot of times it is hard to label a band as active and past. It's hard to define a band who has released one E.P. a few years ago on a label, but is still active, has released a few albums on a couple different labels but is still listed with the other bands on the label's site. I'm not sure there is a conclusive answer, but I was considering maybe just one list with explanations in paranthesis like (disbanded) or (currently signed to _____). Also, some labels, like Elephant 6 lists artist as 'The Collective' and 'Extended Family.' When I come across something of this nature, I have been just using that as the headings; which is more than likely what the label would want anyways. Just some stuff to consider. Also, I think that it looks better if you use the 'New Section' heading for the Biography section, because it adds some seperation. Michael Ardaiolo 18:55, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I think the Elephant 6 solution is an elegant one for that particular problem. I think leaving it as "Active" and "Inactive" just as that is fine, but maybe only for larger labels? Smaller ones (i.e. the ones more likely to just do a one-off EP or whatnot) could probably just have one Roster List (or, if you wanted to get complicated, a Active Roster for bands that do multiple releases and are still signed, Inactive for bands that DID multiple releases and left/brokeup, and One-Offs for acts that just did an EP or whatever.). Rev. Syung Myung Me 19:02, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I say for now we leave the active roster and inactive roster, and fill out the lists as well as possible. We can always change it later. Paul Lynch 19:26, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

LP Section?
Just a quick question -- what's the LP section/category for? Stuff that was only released on Full-Length Vinyl? Or should we just roll that in with "Album"? Rev. Syung Myung Me 19:50, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

We could just put normal albums under category:album. After looking into it, EPs do refer to extended play records, but EP is also used colliquolly as a name for a 'mini album.' LP, however, does not share the same meaning as album. The LP category will be taken off.

P.S.- Why do hardcore kids never get laid? Because they're always lying about the 7 inches they don't have! Paul Lynch 01:33, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Request Artist/Label Pages
Should we have a link to this on the front page? If not, where can I find them, because I was just going down the list of the label pages and filling in information. Michael Ardaiolo 02:53, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I actually think this might be a good idea; sure, we've got the Wanted Pages page (which I've basically been going down and jumping around on), but a Requested Artist/Label page might be useful, too, if anything, as a place to give people a place to put artist links that might not have popped up yet in other pages, like they're not referenced by any other existing artist yet.

(Perhaps I might do a similar thing for a place for people to put new Mix CD titles, too, depending if that turns out to be a problem, like people not really knowing where to start their own mix CD page?) Rev. Syung Myung Me 07:12, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I say we should put a link either on the main page or community portal page for the request pages right now. Later, on the main page we can kind of put links to everything, but I don't think we're getting much(if any) traffic right now, so we should just do whatever is easiest for us to deal with. Paul Lynch 19:23, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of old posts
Vote: should we delete posts on this page about issues that have been resolved?

Yes- Paul Lynch 19:29, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC) Yes- Michael Ardaiolo 15:59, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC) I think so -- it'd make these smaller. If anything, keep a record of them on Old Decisions or something, but even that I think probably wouldn't even really be needed. - Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:21, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I will try and delete all the old 'resolved' posts- but after thinking any kind of 'vote' we should have should be archived I think, and also maybe for the time being we should have a policies page, which at a later date we can use to put various policies under applicable discussion sections. -Paul Lynch(not logged in) 21:40, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Community Portal
I just made a list of things I think should get done, that wouldn't take more than 2 weeks to do. My idea is that if everything is agreed upon, and all the pages we have are in the right format, we can continue adding information in a much cleaner way. I don't contribute as much as you guys (especially as far as biographies and reviews go), but I am really good at changing the way things look relatively fast. In the future, if we decide on a template change or anything like that, I could take care of changing all the current pages and things like that. Let me know what you think of the list on the community portal- if you want to add anything, feel free, if you want to tell me that we don't need to do all of those things, or it's too ambitious for a two week project, let me know. Paul Lynch 19:38, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

anyone out there?
hey, are we taking a vacation from your subculture soundtrack? we should all talk on aim sometime. Paul Lynch 04:11, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Heh, I've just been AFK for the past day and tomorrow too -- between work and all, heh. I intended to do some work this morning, but I overslept and didn't have any time to! Rev. Syung Myung Me 06:27, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

yea. i work a lot and strange hours, so i throw on an article or two when i have 30 minutes to spare. that has been the biggest problem with originally getting the site started, i would get real motivated then back off for a while. i aim to add at least one article a day, but that does not always happen. Michael Ardaiolo 17:09, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Organization
Alright, after spending about a week away from here, I'm ready to get back to work. Here's my new to-do list, if anyone would like to join me.
 * Categorize all Uncategorized Pages
 * Rename all Album Reviews currently under artist names
 * Go through Oldest Pages(special pages) and check for good form
 * Promote Wikicities
 * post on hardcore/indie forums
 * maybe try to get on the main wikicities page?
 * Go through category:label A-Z and check accuracy and beef up

Just a little cleaning up. Paul Lynch 08:33, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

hahah, Jinx! I just posted this too, I think yours posted while I was busy rambling... - Rev. Syung Myung Me 08:42, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Right-o. Add stuff to this list that you think needs to be done, and later I'll move it to the community portal(which I will try to make look somewhat decent as well).

Idea And Cleanup
First:

What if we put policy stuff on the Main (i.e. Non-Talk) Decisions page? Like, for example, the Self-Titled Album Protocol would go on that page. So we could remove it from here, and clean this up a little bit? That might be cool -- if y'all want, I can do that, but I figure asking first would be awesome. (Or perhaps the Policies page as thought about before?

Second:

Paul started it, but then I started helping out with it too -- moving off the early artist-album review pages to sole-album review pages (like breaking up the ...And You Shall Know Us By The Trail of Dead page into review pages and a main Artist page). The thing to remember is to make sure to delete the newly blank artist page, otherwise, the wiki will still think that page has information on it, and it won't show up on the Wanted Page List, and it'll just act as a redirect to that one album, making it more difficult to add other records or artist information or whatever. So, either way, that's somethign to make sure. I know Paul's been working on that, and I just went through the A section of the Category:Artist list. (I am leaving live the artist pages that have the templates without information dumped in. Not sure whether or not we should delete those -- I could go either way, and I figure at least we're not harming anything by leaving those in.)

Anyway, though -- with the new album pages, someone's definitely gonna clean those up; I'm just basically copy pasting them in and then throwing a album template on top, Looks like the reviews are unsigned too -- think they're all michael's though, but yeah. Anyway, though, yeah. They'll need a bit of work, but not too awfully much I don't think. Just a little bit of cleaning up and plunking tracklists in there I think, and that'll be about it.

So, the cool thing is, though, it looks like we're going pretty good. Still doesn't seem that we've got a whole lot of other, outside folks reading here, but it's probably just a matter of time, and once we get things more Ready For Prime Time, I think we'll get more people in to do stuff. And that will be pretty cool. Especially if we get all the review pages put on album/single/ep pages -- those are good reviews, and I think if that content is easy to find/set out, it'll be a great draw.

So, anyway, though. I am hell of tired right now, and I fear I'm rambling. So I shall stop. Anyway, basically check out what I did and that'd be awesome. Um, not sure if there's anything else I was gonna mention. Probably kittens, because kittens are totally awesome. - Rev. Syung Myung Me 08:41, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Rev, thanks for the info about the blank redirect pages. If you ask me, I think we should get rid of the empty templated pages, so we can kind of keep track of where we are(if everything is pretty now and policies are made really clear, it will be easier later)- it would be great to know exactly how much we have right now. As far as policies, my vote would be to put policies on related discussion pages (for example, the self titled album policy would be on the Template:Album discussion page), but perhaps we could make a Policies page to put things first, so we can vote then move the policy to where it should go? This page is really just making due until it matters that we're more organized. And while I'm here- Rev, if you haven't heard Regina Spektor, do yourself a favor and download some! Let's get some things done. Paul Lynch 08:49, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Man, horizontal rules make these easier to follow, too!

But yeah -- I just noticed that a day or two ago about the redirects; I was fixing a capitolization-typo, then was going to go back and fix the source page, then found that it just forwarded it on to the right page. So, yeah -- that's pretty interesting and normally really useful (just not in this application!). But yeah -- I'd probably vote to remove the template-only ones too, just to make that a little bit cleaner and stuff. In fact, here, why not do a vote right here below?

For policies, I think that a two-pronged approach would be good. It'd probably be good to have like a Consolidated Rulebook in one place, as well as rules pasted where they'd apply as well. A policies page (linked from the main page) might be more clear, although I also kind of like the idea of cannibalizing the main Decisions page -- so it's sort of like Decisions Made (Decisions) and Decisions Being Made (Talk:Decisions), but I could go either way on that. There should also probably be an OldTalk:Decisions page where we throw off some of the old comments that aren't really live anymore -- clean this page up a bit. Maybe I'll throw that in as a vote, too.

Also -- saw Regina Spektor on Conan a while ago; that song was cool, so I downloaded some of her stuff. Some of it was _awesome_, but some of it didn't click. I think it was all from the new album though.

And as for promoting, I've been kind of plugging it around, too, although not anywhere too big yet, just because I think we should get a bit more artist pages in. I've been kind of emphasizing the Mix CD thing, since that's sort of my baby anyway, but being sure to play up the other aspects, because I do think this has the potential to be a Known Good Source, y'know? - Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:47, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

VOTE: Should we delete artist pages that just have the template pasted in and nothing more?
 * Yes -- Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:47, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes -- Paul Lynch 17:49, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, these are only on artists from the first couple of labels (alphabetically) -- Michael Ardaiolo 17:59, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

VOTE: Should we do an OldTalk:Decisions page for old comments here?
 * Yes - Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:47, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * No - Just erase them! Paul Lynch 17:49, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * No - while it could be useful, would more than likely just take up space Michael Ardaiolo 17:59, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

VOTE: Where should we put decided upon things?
 * Decisions
 * Decisions & Applicable Discussion Pages
 * Policies
 * Policies & Applicable Discussion Pages


 * Decisions/Discussion - Rev. Syung Myung Me 16:47, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Policies for decided policies, Decisions to vote on policy Paul Lynch 17:49, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * what paul said Michael Ardaiolo 17:59, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

repeated names
Should we put up disambiguation pages for repeated names of songs/labels/artists? For example, the band World Leader Pretend, and the song World Leader Pretend: given the current policies I would assume the band would be the link World Leader Pretend and the song would be REM:World Leader Pretend. Let me know your thoughts on issues like this. (Keep in mind that a possibility would be to make all albums Artist:Album and all songs Artist:Album:Song similar to how wikibooks writes their entries). 141.225.193.166 19:45, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)