Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:30, 22 April 2010

Biography: Musicians C‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography C This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

Archives

Archive 1: October 2007 Archive 2: October 2007 - October 2009

REMOVE THE NEO PROGRESSIVE LABEL

All music has proven to be a poor source for genre labeling time and time again. Please remove this source.

One of countless examples: Opeth is labeled as a Symphonic Black Metal and Gothic Metal band. This doesn't even make sense, and most bands have a hit and miss genre. 30 seconds to mars have no progressive elements, remove the label please. You're giving wikipedia a bad reputation for inaccuracies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjgone2 (talk • contribs) 03:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

This is, by far, one of the most inaccurate genres on wikipedia. "30 Seconds to Mars have been stated by reviewers and criticts to play within the genres of hard rock, emo, neo-progressive, progressive metal, alternative metal and post-grunge." I suggest that, after that statement "But according to the definitions of progressive-metal and neo progressive on Misplaced Pages, these labelings are incorrect" This is a contradiction of those genre pages, and a matter of Misplaced Pages's credibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.3.130.220 (talk) 22:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I second that^. Inaccuracies like these are one of the many reasons Misplaced Pages isn't taken seriously as a reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.101.166.64 (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

not pop rock

there not pop rock case they dont sing like pop rock (Seth4000 (talk) 16:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)) Seth4000

Given that they are popular rock, I would say they are. If you can think of an intelligent reason as to why they are not, please, feel free to say.--Floydiac (talk) 19:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand

Why you reverted this edit?--95.239.183.172 (talk) 17:13, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Emo and post hardcore

These sources aren't reliable. This isn't reliable because is a gig review of an user that is called Roxy Iqbal. There were no sources saying that Roxy was a music critic or anything. So this was just a fan calling 30 Seconds to Mars "emo". That doesn't seem to fit Wikipedias standards of a reliable resource.

This was from an Alex Fletcher in a place called Digitalspy. Again, searches for Alex Fletcher revealed that the guy is not known for being a music critic. Furthermore, in searching Digitalspy, I found out that the place is a FORUM. That could mean that anyone can use it. That is not reliable resources, and again seems to violate Misplaced Pages standards.

This is the same thing. This place is a COMMUNITY. That could mean that anyone can use it. It is from a 20 years old girl called Jordan Dowling () that is sign up on the community. Again seems to violate Misplaced Pages standards. These sources aren't reliable, so I delete it.--Loverdrive (talk) 12:54, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

All Music Guide says post grunge and neo prog. if A Beautiful Lie is an emo album, under the heading "Styles" there was written "emo". So, stop changeling the genre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.47.179.208 (talk) 00:43, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Still, READ THE SOURCE!!!!! The genre is post grunge and neo prog! Can you read? Have you ever read that review? Stop changeling the genre! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.49.225.4 (talk) 17:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

If the review says that the album is emo, it was referred like here.--Loverdrive (talk) 14:58, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

If this review meant that the album is emo, under the heading "Genre" or "Style" was written emo (for example, here, the review clearly says that the album is emo because it is written under the correct heading). The A Beautiful Lie review says "this is as earnest as an emo record gets", but don't clearly said A Beautiful Lie is an emo album.--Loverdrive (talk) 13:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Roxy Iqbal is actually a producer working at BBC, so that is a valid source. It is not by a random person. As for Digital Spy, they do have a forum, but the news/content on the page surely isn't open for the public to write! Alex Fletcher is an entertainment reporter working for Digital Spy. All in all, both are reliable sources. Nymf _talk/contr. 18:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Digital Spy is a forum so don't pass WP:RS criteria.--Loverdrive (talk) 18:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

No, it's not. There is a forum ON there. Big difference. Digital Spy is an entertainment site. Nymf _talk/contr. 18:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Digital Spy don't pass WP:RS criteria.--Loverdrive (talk) 18:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Dragon Age

Shouldn't there be a mention of their song "This is War' being used in the BioWare game, Dragon Age: Origins? Olioster (talk) 10:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Genre (obviously)

There are certain thing that are in fact not up for discussion, such as WP:RS. Virgin Records obviouly cannot be used as a source for "nu metal" as it is a primary source (bands and their labels must never be sed for genre categorisations) and the Italian Murder Inn site is self-described as an "independent webzine", which again fails WP:RS by a country mile. Sorry guys. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:30, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

These sources are reliable, they are also considered on Italian wiki where the band's genre is heavily disputed.--Matthew Riva (talk) 14:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

No, the sources are not reliable. Please read WP:RS and the above comment to understand why not. Just because they may be used on Italian wiki, does not mean that they are acceptable here. Nouse4aname (talk) 15:38, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Explain me why these sources are not reliable. I read the guideline and they pass WP:RS criteria.--Matthew Riva (talk) 21:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Where are they published and by whom? Are they third-party? If there is no print-copy, commercially-published, of any of their material, they must not be used. All fanzines and "webzines" are obviously useless as sources. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 23:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

This source is reliable. The review is written by Filippo Nembrini (a musical critical) for an important Italian rock music magazine. This passes the WP:RS criteria, so why you delete the source?--Matthew Riva (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

This aint EMO! This band is clearly not emo, maybe they look like one but they clearly havent got emo type of music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soaptavish (talk • contribs) 20:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC) EXACTLY!!!!!! THEY ARE NOT EMO!!!! SO REMOVE THE TAG OF EMO!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.157.50.113 (talk) 04:48, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I have to reopen the genre question. The genres in the infobox don't make any sense and the more important, I don't see any sources cited for those genres. I know that Misplaced Pages isn't based on original research, but I don't see how could anyone consider this band progressive in any way. I don't think that they pass for any sort of heavy metal either, but definitely not for progressive. Progressive rock / metal is characterized by unusual measures, melodies, complex harmonies, often influenced by jazz fusion and classical music and songs in that genre are usually very hard to perform. This band doesn't come even close to passing those criteria, and if you compare it to progressive metal bands like Dream Theater and Symphony X, there are absolutely no similarities. I see a lot of forums and talk pages where people say very stupid things about this band, calling them progressive, experimental, etc. But this is an encyclopedia. We should be serious. This is a popular band, so I am sure that there are many sources calling them many different genres. We should find ones that are more serious. I am sure we could find sources for genres like pop rock and post-grunge, which best describe this band. — NikFreak (leave message) 22:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

This encyclopedia is based on reliable sources. Read the sources, and stop saying stupidity as pop rock.--Unwish (talk) 00:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Stupidity? And what would you label them with? Sure we need reliable sources, but saying it's stupid to label them as pop-rock is STUPID. They clearly are a commercial band trying to make money on generic sounding music that doesn't really stand out by anything in the sea of other pop-rock artists. A few screams in standard pop-rock outfit doesn't make the band metal, and it definitely doesn't make it progressive or experimental. The progressive label is what is REALLY stupid. And it's really a disgrace for Misplaced Pages. No sane person would label them as such. — Roxor (talk) 16:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

You know what's REALLY stupid? Holding up your opinion as fact". --King Öomie 18:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll assume that you were referring to the part of my comment where I said that they are making generic sounding commercial music. I agree that that's only an opinion and I apologize if I offended any fans here, but what I said about the genre isn't an opinion. They are not progressive, they are not metal and they are most certainly not experimental. But since Misplaced Pages only uses "reliable" sources, I guess that I am just wasting my time. It's just sad to see such nonsenses on an encyclopedic site which should be serious and reliable. — Roxor (talk) 20:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

The only large site I can find with a direct genre listing for 30 Seconds to Mars is MTV.co.uk (http://www.mtv.co.uk/artists/30-seconds-to-mars) which says "Genre(s) | Alternative rock, Emo" I'm still new to wiki so not sure if this is source enough, MTV seems a fairly reliable source to me. Everywhere else seems to avoid mentioning genres specifically presumably because the reactions all to common when people disagree. --Linden Ryuujin 16:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I think that the genre should be taken from a review and not just a field. Those two are probably the most acceptable ones you could find from reliable sources. I read some of the reviews about the band and there are some of the biggest nonsenses I've ever seen. To be most objective while determining a genre, you either analyze the music according to the description of the genre, or you can try comparing a band to another within the same genre (which is not the happiest solution, because the genres can be stretched already until it comes to complete mislabeling). Labeling 30STM as progressive, experimental or any sort of metal just shows the ignorance of the critics. Just by comparing them to some bands within those genres you can see that there are little to no similarities. At best, they could be labeled as alternative rock. I know that there must be reliable sources, but at least we can find the ones that make some sense. And if there are no agreements, there is always an option to remove the genre field from the infobox and leave opinions of the critics in genre section (this has been done on many other pages). — Gahonzu (talk) 20:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd say they're new prog instead of neo prog as they've got more of an alternative rock sound rather than 80's pop sound. I mean Marillion are neo prog and they sound like 80's pop. Muse are more similiar to 30stm and they're new prog.

30 Seconds To Mars must be Thirty Seconds to Mars.

Hello everyone. The proper name of "30 Seconds To Mars" must be "Thirty Seconds To Mars", see their official webpage http://www.thirtysecondstomars.com/ which is stated underneath this article! Who of you will this alsao change in de Dutch Misplaced Pages? Thanks for doing this! Greetings of Nico from Gouda, the Netherlands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.177.188.137 (talk) 15:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

It is displayed both ways, including at the band's own site, which you linked to. WP:COMMONNAME is clear on this point. The majority of third-party sources use "30 seconds", not "Thirty seconds"- so "30 seconds" will contain the article, and "Thirty seconds" will remain a redirect to it. --King Öomie 18:00, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Please also keep in mind that the various language versions of Misplaced Pages differ on many points of policy- our naming guidelines may differ from yours. The Dutch Misplaced Pages adopting an article name doesn't necessarily mean that the English version must follow suit. --King Öomie 18:04, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

I also think it should be "Thirty Seconds to Mars". That is what they are referred to on the band's official website, and their most recent releases are under the name "Thirty Seconds to Mars". TheSickBehemoth (talk)TheSickBehemoth

"Articles are normally titled using the most common English-language name of the subject of the article. In determining what this name is, we follow the usage of reliable sources, such as those used as references for the article. ...

...Common usage in reliable sources is preferred to technically correct but rarer forms, whether the official name, the scientific name, the birth name, the original name or the trademarked name."

_{-WP:COMMONNAME}

--King Öomie 18:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Formation and Debut album

Should these sections be merged together? or at least edited slightly, the formation section gives the impression (to me) that both Kevin Drake and Solon Bixler were in the band briefily (despite being there nearly 2 and 3 years respectively) before Tomo joined the group.

The departure of Bixler and the addition of Tomo should perhaps be added to the debut album section? (mainly because these events happening during that timeline). Could be wrong, just thought I would mention it -- HrZ (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Ancient English Writing

The 4 symbols shown in the Phoenix logo are ancient english writing. The each stand for a Celestial Planet in the old days. In order, they stand for Peace, Love, Hope, and Serenity. The 4 smybols, can be found on this link: http://www.thirtysecondstomars.net/images/symbols/glyph.png That is an offical Thirty Seconds to Mars website.

While that would be interesting, it's actually not true. See Rune. None of those symbols appear in old english, or even any Germanic language recorded by history. They're also not symbols for planets in greek, or any other language. Basically, they were invented, and ascribed meaning, by the band. --King Öomie 13:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Alternative Rockhttp://www.lastfm.pt/music/30+Seconds+to+Mars/A+Beautiful+Lie</ref >http://www.kewego.com.br/video/iLyROoaft4Kc.html</ref >
Post-grunge{{citar web |url=http://ego.globo.com/Gente/Noticias/0,,MUL319900-9798,00-JARED+LETO+TRAZ+SUA+BANDA+PARA+APRESENTACAO+EM+SAO+PAULO+VEJA+AS+EXIGENCIAS.html/ |titulo: alternative rock genre </ref >http://www.lastfm.com.br/music/30+Seconds+to+Mars</ref >
Post-grunge</ref>
Alternative Metal
Neo-progressive rock

NOT EMO

1. "Album Review: 30 Seconds To Mars – This Is War". Consequence of Sound. Retrieved 13 March 2010.
2. ^ "A Beautiful Lie - Overview". Allmusic. Retrieved 13 March 2010.
3. "30 Seconds to Mars - 30 Seconds to Mars". sputnikmusic. Retrieved 13 March 2010.

• C-Class biography articles
• C-Class biography (musicians) articles
• Unknown-importance biography (musicians) articles
• Musicians work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles