Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alternative music/Archive 3

Dookie passed FA

Just want to say thanks to all the copy editors. This is my greatest achievement ever! Xihix 19:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Pearl Jam at FAC

I've finally got around to nominating Pearl Jam as a FAC. Feel free to comment, object or support. CloudNine 10:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Nirvana discography

Nirvana discography is now nominated to become a featured list here. This would be the project's second featured list if it is successful, after Wilco discography. All supports, opposes, and comments are welcome. --Brandt Luke Zorn 10:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice. I'm doing the same with Pixies discography. CloudNine 10:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Blood Sugar Sex Magik at FAC.

Here. Comments are welcomed :) Kamryn · Talk 13:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Henry Rollins at GA/R

Henry Rollins needs to be referenced and cleaned up mostly, which I'm working on at the moment. Help appreciated. CloudNine 09:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Wilco and Loose Fur bandmembers and discographies

Since both Wilco and Loose Fur have categories in them which cause them to be included set of articles that are tagged by bot with {{ChicagoWikiProject}}, it might make sense for the band members and related discographies to have similar categories. I was looking at Jeff Tweedy and noticed that he has Category:People from Belleville, Illinois and Category:Illinois musicians in his article. If he had Category:People from Chicago or Category:Chicago musicians in his article then he would be tagged with {{ChicagoWikiProject}} and thus they would fall under WP:CHICAGO. As WP:CHICAGO director, I would like to monitor these musicians, but I generally leave category decision to the editors of the pages. Please make whatever category decisions you feel would be correct with this in mind for all band members, the bands and all discographies.

I am placing this message several places. I am asking all respondents to respond here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 13:28, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I added Category:Chicago musicians and ChicagoWikiProject to the Jeff Tweedy, Glenn Kotche, and Mikael Jorgensen articles. —Christopher Mann McKay^talk 22:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Great. What do you think about Uncle Tupelo belonging in WP:CHICAGO?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Belleville, Illinois is nowhere near Chicago. Teemu08 00:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The Reputation Good Article review

One of this project's Good Articles, The Reputation, is under Good Article review (here). Members of this project are welcome to contribute to the discussion and hopefully edit the article to avoid it being delisted form GA status. Drewcifer3000 22:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Magazines for reference

I just discovered my library keeps bound copies of Alternative Press, Mojo, and Spin dating back to 2000 in circulation, in case anyone wants me to look for any articles/reviews in particular. WesleyDodds 00:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Great! Could you have a look in Spin September 2004 for "Life to the Pixies"? I'm trying to find information about Santiago and Lovering between their disbanding and reunion. A bit general, but if you find something that's not mentioned in the Joey Santiago article (especially the last two sections of the biography), give me a shout. CloudNine 08:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I hope I can find something useful. I was really excited today when I found a short piece in Spin about Reprise's refusal to release Yankee Hotel Foxtrot, but quickly discovered that both the album page and the Wilco article already presented the same information via different sources. WesleyDodds 08:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yea, I had a little too much time on my hands this summer. By the way, "Wilco albums" is now a featured topic candidate (pending the GA review of Kicking Television). Teemu08 02:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Today (song) at FAC

"Today" is currently nominated to be featured. Comments, supports, and opposes are welcome. --Brandt Luke Zorn 04:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Nine Inch Nails Featured Article candidacy

One of this project's "High" importance, A-rated articles, Nine Inch Nails, is currently a Featured Article nominee. Check out the nomination page and take a look at the article and let us know what you think. Suggestions and votes of either persuasion are all welcome and appreciated. Drewcifer 07:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Two more FACs: The Make-Up and The Make-Up discography

The Make-Up and their discography are currently a Featured Article candidate and a Featured List candidate. Comments, suggestions, and votes either way are appreciated. Drewcifer 08:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Wilco at FAC

Seems like we're bombarding the FA process. Wilco is now there as well, you can comment here. Teemu08 21:22, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Neutral Milk Hotel discography at FLC

Furthering our bombardment of the Featuring system with this discography of the indie rock band Neutral Milk Hotel. It is currently nominated to become a Featured List here. As always, supports, comments, and opposes are welcome. --Brandt Luke Zorn 14:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

John Frusciante at FAC

Our Featured Article Candidates keep on coming. John Frusciante is a current candidate. I hope as many of you can find the time to comment on its nomination as possible. Grim-Gym 18:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Great! This may be a record month for featured articles. I wish I could regain the discipline to sit down and finish an article (my current projects seem to keep expanding). CloudNine 18:20, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Nirvana discography at FLC, pt. 2

Once again, Nirvana discography is nominated at WP:FLC here. All supports, comments, and opposes are welcome, and don't forget to vote on The Make-Up discography or Neutral Milk Hotel discography, the former of which needs three supports in a short amount of time to get featured and the latter of which I wrote. --Brandt Luke Zorn 04:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Did you know...

• that Portal:Alternative music could do with more DYKs? Currently we've got about ten facts, but I'd like to reach thirty or forty. If you post them here, I'll fix it up at the portal. Tips for good DYKs include odd band names, interesting other careers of members, or particular song facts. Example:

• ..that Pixies drummer David Lovering used to perform as "The Scientific Phenomenalist"?

Even one or two will help. CloudNine 15:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

There were some older ones on the portal that aren't listened now. The only one I can remember is the "Crackity Jones" one. WesleyDodds 20:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. CloudNine 09:18, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I think something from They Might Be Giants could be listed. There's a lot of interesting tidbits there (Dial-a-Song sevice, appearances on Tiny Toon Adventures, John Linnell ranking on People magazine's "Most Beautiful People" poll seemingly due only to fan support, etc.) WesleyDodds 09:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative music

Uh, the redirect for alternative music is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative music. Am I alone in thinking this is utterly bizarre? WesleyDodds 23:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I've moved it to RfD, see here. But even now, I still think it's odd and should be kept. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 00:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed; I've "voted" speedy keep. CloudNine 08:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Two more FLCs

FYI, The Breeders discography and John Frusciante discography are up for nomination here and here. CloudNine 11:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Del Palmer

Editors here may be interested in working to improve Del Palmer (best known as Kate Bush's bassist/engineer/ex-boyfriend) or taking part in a deletion discussion about the article: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Del Palmer (second nomination). Bondegezou 11:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Current nominations

As of 19 September2007 (because I've lost track of what's at FAC and FLC):

FAC

• John Frusciante
• Audioslave
• Nine Inch Nails
• The Make-Up
• Pearl Jam

FLC

• The Breeders discography
• John Frusciante discography
• Nirvana discography

A tip: you may want to mention the project in the FAC/FLC nomination, as it does help to attract interested editors. CloudNine 19:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

List of Powderfinger awards is up there too. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 23:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Wilco albums is back at featured topic candidates. Teemu08 01:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Blood Sugar Sex Magik

Blood Sugar Sex Magik will be featured on the main page tomorrow, September 24, 2007. NSR77 ^T_C 22:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Watchlisted - bring it on, vandals! Although I'll be out for part of the day =\ Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 23:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

"FA Wall"

The Featured Article wall is thrust into chaos with the major title length of "Today (Smashing Pumpkins song)". Although not the article title, I suggest we shorten it to simply "Today", clearing up the irregular spaces following it. NSR77 ^T_C 21:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. We have a huge space down the left-hand side these days. I wonder if it's worth moving the member table there. CloudNine 07:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the stats table should go there, the member table is too wide (if people want to add additional comments, etc.). Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 07:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Nine Inch Nails discography at FLC

One of this project's lists, Nine Inch Nails discography, is currently a Featured List candidate. Please take a look at the article and leave your comments here. Drewcifer 04:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Added some comments, I'll support when they're done. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 01:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of which, I need to find a source for the US sales of all the NIN albums. I've been unable to find any, but assume that Soundscan.com would have that kind of info. Does anyone on this project subscribe to Soundscan and be willing to double check the sales real quick? It would seriously take like two minutes. Drewcifer 03:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Smashing Pumpkins on Main Page

According to the Featured Article queue, The Smashing Pumpkins will be on the Main Page on October 11th. Mark you calendaers and be prepared to revert a whole lot of nonsense. WesleyDodds 22:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Kickass. I saw them last night—came about a foot away from Billy, that was cool...Anyway—lock and load. Grim 03:04, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

New FL

List of Powderfinger awards is now featured. Since I'm a bit new to this project, could someone else add it to the project page? Thanks,  — Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 07:49, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. Good work! WesleyDodds 07:54, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks :)  — Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 07:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

The Smashing Pumpkins discography

This list has been sitting in the back of my mind for a long while now, and I know a few other people expressed interest in whipping it into shape. It has now been tagged with {{refimprove}} ([1]), so now would be as good a time as ever to commence work on it. I thought that a list would be unusual as a COTW, so I'll just put this notice and contact a few people I think may be interested. Thanks, --Brandt Luke Zorn 03:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The booklet to The Aeroplane Flies High box set has a comprehensive discography up to 1996. WesleyDodds 06:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The Great Rock Discography has a comprehensive discography covering releases up to 2001. I'll help if I can, but won't be able to contribute next week.--Michig 19:13, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Dream Days at the Hotel Existence at FAC

The article is currently at FAC. All comments are welcome here. Thanks, — Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 02:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

More discographies

Given that working on discography pages seems to be appealing to several editors right now, how about we work together on priority discographies? Of our Featured Lists, only Nirvana discography deals with a popular band with large, verifiable sales figures, lots of chart placings, and a relatively sizable catalogue; Wilco discography is the next closest, but on a smaller scale. However, Nine Inch Nails discography is up at FLC, Brandt Luke Zorn is gathering people together to work on the Smashing Pumpkins discography, and there are some people fixing up the RHCP discography. Any people interested in tackling the discographies for other Top or High-Importance bands? I'll list a couple of first-rank suggestions, and interested editors can list their names under them. WesleyDodds 04:26, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

1. Pixies discography (I know CloudNine has done some work here)
   • (sign here; repeat format for other discographies)
2. Pearl Jam discography (This one would probably be the most difficult out of the entire project, due to all their live albums)
3. R.E.M. discography
4. Radiohead discography
5. Foo Fighters discography
6. Oasis discography
7. Green Day discography

Hmm...none of these particularly take my fancy, unfortunately. Although if the Pearl Jam one is that tough, I'd be willing to lend a hand if anyone else was willing to do the major work on it :)  — Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 04:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I think I may eventually work on Radiohead's discography, after we sort out The Smashing Pumpkins discography. Pearl Jam's would be cool too, but the live albums make it daunting. As for Radiohead, I love the band to death but I always feel like I don't know enough about them to contribute to Radiohead-related articles. However, I think I could contribute to that band in some way by working on their discography. Also, I'm working part-time on Pavement discography, which will probably be a Featured List soon too after I beef up the lead. --Brandt Luke Zorn 04:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Pearl Jam's is in OK state, but yeah, it would be a lot of work. And in the spirit of what Brandt Luke Zorn said, I'm doing Powderfinger discography now, although the FLC looks to be doing OK. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 04:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Pearl Jam will be brutal with all of those officially released bootlegs. Teemu08 07:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

For Pearl Jam discography, the bootlegs are mostly covered at Pearl Jam Official Bootlegs, so it wouldn't be as hard as it seems. Pixies discography is surprisingly hard, as there's plenty of re-releases on different labels. That's a project I'd like to finish; I'm happy to help with the others. CloudNine 08:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

It seems as though discographies have become the "it" thing to work on these days. Red Hot Chili Peppers discography is, for the most part, done. If anyone would like to look it over before an FLC, that'd be great. NSR77 ^T_C 15:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Pavement discography is now completed and nominated for featuring here, which means that I'll have more time to work on The SP discography–I don't have any major schoolwork coming up so I think I'll work on it a lot over the weekend (hopefully). Any comments are, of course, welcome as always regarding the Pavement nomination. --Brandt Luke Zorn 05:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

NME Originals

FYI: A few issues of the NME Originals reprint series--which reprints articles, interviews and reviews from the archives of the NME and Melody Maker about a given topic--are still in stock. You can do a Google search to find the official site where you can order from. Relevant alt-rock editions still in stock are the issues devoted to Britpop, Goth, Madchester, and Radiohead (I myself own the Britpop and Goth issues); unfortunately the Nirvana, Oasis, and Manic Street Preachers issues are sold out. These are great resources that I recommend you check out if you don't mind ordering them. WesleyDodds 03:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Genre pages

Anyone interested on working on genre pages? We've got one FA (Grunge music) and one GA (the main article, Alternative rock), but I'd like there to be more, if possible. A lot of the pages are in poor shape and in a way they are in need of attention over the pages of countless bands, since they belong to various alt-rock subgenres. I've had Britpop and Gothic rock on my to-do list for months (did quite a bit of work on the former) and I'd love to work on Shoegazing if only I could just find the sources. Anyone else interested? WesleyDodds 03:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I would be interested in doing Indie rock or Lo-fi music somewhere down the road, but I wouldn't be able to start that until I got all the other stuff I want to do done. So it would be a while. --Brandt Luke Zorn 01:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to help, but I don't really know enough about genres in general to contribute anything much. I could copyedit an article or something like that. Grim 17:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Claude Coleman Jr (Ween)

Hi, the page for Claude Coleman Jr., drummer for Ween, is in really bad shape. It seems to be a full cut and paste from a promotional site. It's completely unsourced too. I don't know enough about the band to fix it up but I know there are a lot of Ween fans around so thought this might be the place to mention it. Fathomharvill 03:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Re-assessment for Belle & Sebastian?

I apologize if this isn't the right place to make this request. I've put some work into the article, and believe that it is now better than "Start-class." I've done a bit of tweaking, added a few facts, added some pictures and most importantly added references. There wasn't a single ref to be found a few days ago, now there are twenty-seven. I'd be much obliged if someone could look it over and tell me where it needs improvement. I want to build this article to FA status, but have never done so before, so I don't really know where to begin. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 08:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• Feel free to change the assesments at your discretion (although a B level should be the highest for a non GA/FA). If you're looking for pointers on how to get to a featured article, take a look at the front page of the Wikiproject and glance at the articles that are already FAs. Look for patterns, particularly in ideas for sections. I'd also recommend taking it to good article candidates first. Teemu08 23:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Just like Heaven (song) at peer review

Ceoil suggested I push it to FAC, but I met him halfway and put it up at Peer Review. The article's as complete as can be reference-wise, so if ou see anything else that can be done, please drop by at Wikipedia:Peer review/Just like Heaven (song)/archive1 and leave comments. WesleyDodds 09:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

As an FYI, I've created a bot, User:CloudNineBot, to run through peer review every so often and update our peer review subpage. CloudNine 19:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dream Days at the Hotel Existence

New FAC - all help appreciated! Dihydrogen Monoxide 08:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Kim Gordon

Hello all, I've started doing some work on the Kim Gordon article, and I would like your input on how the article should be formatted, mostly concerning the structure of the article. Right now, the headings "Early years", "Musical career", "Art career", "Personal Life" and "Other work" should be restructured, in my opinion. One of the headings should no doubt be "Sonic Youth", but the problem with that is that her numerous projects and bands are overlapping chronologically and are hard to write about in a biographical way.

So, I would really like your input on how to structure this article. If you have any ideas or pointers, please feel free to share them. Thank you.

By the way, I'm going to remove the Trivia section as soon as I look further into perhaps incorporating the remaining trivia points into the body of the text, as I already have done with a few of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cambrant (talk • contribs) 11:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

My advice is to take a strictly chronological approach to her biography (integrating personal life, side projects, and all that), and then create suitable headers. WesleyDodds 11:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You should perhaps take a look at some of our project FAs: Frank Black, Elliott Smith, John Frusciante and Joey Santiago (well, that's everything but an actual featured article). Which reminds me, I should really finish Kim Deal sometime. CloudNine 12:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Kurt Cobain suicide theories

Given some recent comments on Talk:Kurt Cobain that argue that the article isn't GA status, I feel something needs to be done about the sizable suicide dispute section. While for a while I tolerated it as necessary NPOV balance, now that I think about it the suicide dispute does not need to be discussed at length in the article, since virtually all reliable sources agree he committed suicide. I feel any mention of suicide theories should be done in the appropriate sections of the article that discuss the relevant books and documentaries.

All viewpoints should be discussed concerning this matter. Please add to the discussion on the talk page; hopefully we can clean up the article before it enters WP:GAR. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Branch it off. Teemu08 (talk) 07:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I for one have considered that, but then I wory that it would essentially be a POV fork. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey, if 9/11 conspiracies can be branched off, I don't see why this conspiracy can't be. Teemu08 (talk) 08:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Agree with Teemu08 here... Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 06:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Powderfinger at FAC

Powderfinger is a current featured article candidate. Spebi 09:22, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Silverchair

I'm quite a bit new to this project, and I may not know how it works, but would List of Silverchair awards be included under the scope of this project, on Alternative rock music. If so, there should be a lot of other pages related to Silverchair that would fall under this project's scope. RaNdOm26 (talk) 06:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I would add it, as Silverchair is considered alternative rock. If you want, I can get my bot to do the tagging where necessary. Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 06:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you H₂O, and for your very swift response! You can use your bot to help out with the tagging, Good luck! RaNdOm26 (talk) 06:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, running now, just be sure to check afterwards to see if it screws anything up. Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 07:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 07:30, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright, looks like some of them are done, but there's still several articles left untouched. I'll tag them manually. RaNdOm26 (talk) 06:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

If they weren't tagged, they probably weren't in category:Silverchair... Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 07:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music/Articles by size

Courtesy of User:Betacommand, we now have a list of all articles by length (this also functions as a project watchlist). It'll help us to spot the most comprehensive or shortest articles in the project. CloudNine (talk) 14:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

The Smashing Pumpkins ALM assessment rating

I've kind of been wondering this for some time. Why is the Pumpkins article rated "High" importance and not "Top"? I mean, they are basically the alternative rock band—in that they embody the genre and have never really been linked to any other genre. I mean the Oasis article is "Top" importance and not the Pumpkins article? I realize it's kind of trivial, but I thought I'd mention it here and consider any input before I change it. Grim (talk) 04:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Basically just trying to keep the Top importance category as succinct as possible, which is generally recommended for WikiProject importance rankings. I've thought about adding a few more to the Top Importance ranking, and the Pumpkins were one of my potential candidates (along with Red Hot Chili Peppers, The Cure, Britpop and Gothic rock). The reason they aren't a shoe-in for Top importance ranking is because they haven't influenced too many bands (compare to The Smiths, the least-successful Top Importance band, who have basically influenced every single British alternative rock band since the mid-80s, and quite a number of artists from outside the UK) and they haven't sold as much as an number of other alternative bands, including Nirvana, Pearl Jam, R.E.M., and Oasis, who have all sold more than double what the Pumpkins have worldwide. The Top Importance articles have been selected via a cross section of critieria including importance to alt-rock and importance to rock music as a whole, influence, sales, and historical importance. While I love the Pumpkins, they haven't had the impact on the musical status quo that Nirvana, Pearl Jam, R.E.M., The Smiths, et al had, who were epoch-defining and basically changed the face of music. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

As for our top importance articles, here's the criteria by which I selected them (yeah, it's pretty much me who's assigned importance to most of the articles in the project):

• Alternative rock - Self-evident; the core article.
• Grunge music - the form of alternative most people are familiar with, and the most successful. During the 1990s the press would at times basically use "grunge" as a synonym for alt-rock (which is why you see groups including Smashign Pumpkins, Sonic Youth, and Dinosaur Jr tagged as "grunge" in the press from the time on occasion)
• Indie rock - during the 80s the term was basically synonymous with "alternative rock". Since the breakthrough of Nirvana, it's become a distinct subgenre, and the majority of alternative bands these days come from this subgenre. The most pervasive genre in underground music.
• Nevermind - Out of all the albums in the project, this is the one with the sales, musical influence, and cultural impact that mark it as truly important.
• Nirvana (band) - Basicaly if you asked someone asked to name an alternative band, this is probably the first one they'd name. Synonymous with the genre. Has sold 50 million records worldwide. Popularized alternative rock. Extensively studied and written about. Spawned thousands of bands, both great and, uh, not so great. Most important band of the 1990s, regardless of genre. Probably the one alternative band that has been unequivocally "canonized" in pop music history, so to speak.
• Oasis (band) - What Nirvana was to rock music in the 1990s, Oasis were arguably the British equivalent. The figureheads of Britpop. Since the mid-1990s have been one of the most popular bands in the world. Has sold about 40 to 50 million records worldwide. Very influential. Extensively written about.
• Pearl Jam - Nearly as important as Nirvana in rock music, but have actualy outsold Nirvana (at least in the US; their worldwide sales seem to be tied). Have influenced their share of crappy bands.
• R.E.M. (band) - in the most simplistic (and somewhat inaccurate) terms, the first alternative rock band. The most important alt-rock band of the 80s; highly influential not just in terms of style, but in how they reached mainstream success (which would serve as a model for all those that followed). The first superstar alternative rock band. Press darling; Murmur alone has spawned countless analyses in the mainstream and music press. Has according to some estimates sold 70 million records worldwide.
• Radiohead - The most important alt-rock band of the past decade. More often than not referred to as an "important" rock band. OK Computer was arguably the last great alt-rock album, and in some circles is considered better and more important than Nevermind. I believe they have sold around 35 million worldwide.
• The Smiths - After R.E.M., the most important and influential alt-rock band of the 1980s. In some regards the British equivalent of R.E.M.; they defined the "indie" aesthetic in the UK and were the most successful band from the British indie scene, even if their international commercial impact was marginal. Basically every British band since then has cited them as an influence. Darlings of the 80s music press. Their singer Morrissey has done pretty well for himself, as well.
• U2 - Personally I don't get why anyone classifies them as alternative rock. Sure, they developed from post-punk, but then they went straight into arena superstardom and had little if any interaction with alternative bands of the time. And while I can find a number of sources that call R.E.M. or The Cure "alternative" or "college rock" back in the 80s, I really can't say the same for U2. The labeling of U2 as an alt-rock band seems to have begun sometime around the early 1990s in some circles, but nonetheless . . . The best-selling band here, period, with estimates ranging from 80 milllion to 100 million records sold worldwide. Band of the 1980s and all that. Even more than Nirvana, your average dude off the street knows who U2 are. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

You've made some excellent points here, however... If you look at our list of high-importance articles, nothing else really comes close to the importance of the Pumpkins—not the Chili Peppers, not gothic rock. Britpop maybe. I think the Pumpkins have the necessary combination of sales figures and influence to garner top importance. A band like the Peppers, has the sales figures, but probably not the influence. I think assessing Top importance to the Pumpkins article would be accurate and hard to dispute. I won't press this any further though. If no one agrees with me here then I'll let it go. Grim (talk) 15:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Just as a counterpoint (I understand where you're coming from, and if this were ten years ago I would absolutely agree with you, but in the long-term they haven't proved themselves as important as say Pearl Jam or Radiohead), The Cure have sold more than the Pumpkins (27 million versus 25 million) and have influenced far more bands--including the Pumpkins. Although granted, the Pumpkins are probably more recognizable, and their article definitely gets visited far more often. There is also an interesting point that you've somewhat acknowledged: out of all the major alternative bands, The Smashing Pumpkins are the band that unequivocally, in every interview I've seen, classified themselves as an alternative rock band. Alt-rock bands generally don't like the term "alternative rock". Even with major bands that have described themselves as alt-rock there are some caveats: Michael Stipe certainly considers R.E.M. an alternative rock band, but the rest of the band doesn't seem to go out of their way to classify themselves as such, while Nirvana flipped between calling themselves alt-rock seriously and mockingly, depending on what their mood was during an interview. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The Pumpkins were more of a one-off thing in pop music. After Mellon Collie, no one gave them another glance. It wasn't commercially viable anymore. I'm sure they've influenced some, of course. But really, the Pumpkins haven't really been around all that long. In a few years I'm sure many bands will emerge with elements incorporating what they created. The Cure, on the other hand, should be a Top rated article. They've influenced too many bands to count, and have strong album sales. Radiohead I really see no significance in. They've put out very good stuff, and sold impressively but other then that they're only popular in Europe (mainly the UK). I actually was thinking about this a few weeks ago and asked about 15 of my friends if they've ever heard of Radiohead. I think, if I can remember correctly, only 3 of them had. On another note, the Chili Peppers' early material is pretty revolutionary in funk-rock/metal and kind of set the standard for anyone who followed. Since they became entirely alternative in 1991, their album sales have been very impressive. The Pumpkins should probably be added as a Top importance article, along with The Cure, Gothic Rock and the Chili Peppers. NSR77 ^T_C 01:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Now that I've been thinking about it the last few days, The Cure will definitely be shifted to Top Importance, unless there are some good arguments against. Along with R.E.M. and The Smiths, they're pretty much the holy trinity of 80s alt-rock (which illustrates how different the music was back then; not really loud and angry like it became in the 90s). Also thinking over my Cure sources, the band became an international success around 86-87, just edging out R.E.M.; it just took them longer to break in the mainstream in the US (really a long stretch from 1988 when "Just Like Heaven" entered the top 40 for one week to when they were playing stadiums promoting Disintegration and a number two single with "Lovesong" in 1990).

Still not completely sold on the Chili Peppers. Honestly, up until 1988 they were fairly marginal and poorly reviewed by the music press (I'm sure Grim-Gym and NSR77 will be perfectly glad to tell those not in the know what pivotal event happened around then to make the band relevant). Since then, yeah, they've been huge (aside from the late 90s pre-Californication lull) and they seem even more successful now than they have been in the 90s. However, all the bands that they've influenced seem to be outside of the alt-rock sphere. Specifically, nu-metal bands. Still, after The Cure it seems like the best candidate for shiftng to Top Importance.

On, and on Radiohead: the press--mainstream and music--basically treats them as the Voice of God. Which is probably fine if you agree with them (I for one don't really care for Radiohead, but I do read a lot of music articles). You should see the press surrounding the latest album. They've actually been pretty successful in the US. Aside from high-charting albums, "Creep" was a top 40 hit (and I think it's certified gold). WesleyDodds (talk) 02:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. NSR77 ^T_C 03:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, the one band I think ought to be Top importance but isn't (and hasn't even been discussed here, I think surprisingly) would be Green Day. They popularized pop-punk and inspired, like Nirvana and Pearl Jam before them, a horde of new (often crappy) bands. Plus they've sold 60 million records, had tons of hit singles and at least two hugely important albums. --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 03:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

True. I haven't placed them as top importance for the simple fact that they're more punk than alt-rock, and their impact really has more to do with that genre. In fact, the categorization of them under the project is somewhat a formality, since some sources label them alt-rock but they have little to do with any of the bands or subgenres proper (see also: U2, Depeche Mode). Although to be fair, the band, especially Billie Joe, have mentioned a few times that they were big fans of 80s college rock, specifically Husker Du, the Replacements, R.E.M., and Camper Van Beethoven. By the way, am I the only one here enjoying the hell out of this discussion? It's very "music nerd" of me. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I am hating myself for finding this debate really interesting. Most often I am laughing at these kind of interchanges on wikipedia talk pages, but now I feel I must step into the fray. Specifically with regards to Radiohead's importance. I can't really comprehend how somebody can not have heard of them. Besides the points already made illustrating their importance consider a few other things. Look at Last.fm, the home of the online "I'm so alternative" music listeners (myself included sadly). Even though there are skewing factors such as that they've just released a free-to-download album, and the site is UK-based, it is still simply the largest social music platform and it has 20 million users from more than 232 countries. And the fact is, they've dominated the charts of that website for a long, long time, most of the time being more listened to than The Beatles. My second point is that reviews of other alternative/metal bands often end up using Radiohead as a basis of comparison when a band shows progression in their music. I can think of two allmusic reviews (that I can't currently check up on) that compared Deftones and The Dillinger Escape Plan to Radiohead in a way that seems to put Radiohead a step-above in the general alternative sphere of music. I don't even know if these points are valid or helpful encyclopedically, but they just seem to illustrate some side-effects of their importance in alternative music for me. Just the amount of worship and harsh criticism levelled at the band says something about their widespread influence and importance. I am a rambling "music nerd". Feel free to pick this apart. - Phorque (talk) 12:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the only thing funnier than that SomethingAwful link is some of the stuff the Gallagher brothers have said about Radiohead. Oasis and Radiohead really hate each other. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Well—my argument from the get-go hasn't been focused on sales or even influence really. Can anyone think of a band that fits into the "alternative rock" genre and nothing else?—I can't. The Pumpkins are alternative rock. They are the figureheads and posterchildren for the genre. Nirvana is grunge, the Chili Peppers are many things, The Cure is gothic rock, and Oasis isn't even listed as alternative on their page. The Pumpkins are this genre. I can't think of another band that fits the description as well, and I don't think mainstream populace can either. They are the posterchildren. That's my argument. Grim (talk) 17:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, many of the Top and High Importance bands can be filled specific under alt-rock subgenres (ie, Nirvana and Pearl Jam under grunge, R.E.M. under jangle pop and college rock, The Cure under goth, Oasis under Britpop). However, the Pumpkins aren't the only major band that doesn't fit cleanly into the subgenres, and thus would simply be labeled "alternative rock". To beat a dead horse, like the Pumpkins, Radiohead can't be filed under any specific subgenre. Influenced primarily by American alt-rock bands, they weren't post-grunge and never fit cleanly into the Britpop movement (like the Pumpkins and grune, radiohead were ocasionally tagged as Britpop by lazy writers in the mid-90s). Ignoring that article's somewhat broad use of art rock and electronic music, they would also be simply labeled as alternative rock. (By the way, anyone else remember their guest appearance on South Park? WesleyDodds (talk) 06:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but most bands who are alternative rock often dissuade others from that notion. Maybe they don't like labels? The Pumpkins are the only band who, as Wesley stated, indisputably call themselves 'alternative'. That seems a little funny to me. However, I do think they should be added to the top importance list. On the Radiohead issue: I know Phorque mentioned Last.fm is a UK based website, but...they're a UK based website. I'm sure the majority of that website's users originate from Britain, Whales, etc. Radiohead is not well known in the US, but certainly not underground over here, either. Bands like the Chili Peppers, who sold more than 1.5 million copies of By the Way in the UK and only 1.3 million in the US shows a great international popularity (though they bounced back with Stadium Arcadium which ended up selling 3 million more in the US than the UK). The fact that they held the world's highest grossing concert with over 240,000 punters (Live in Hyde Park) in London is astounding. They also, in 1999, held a free concert at Red Square in Russia with over 300,000 in attendance. Overall, the wide ranging music-related articles we have been discussing here, in my opinion, should all be added. On the topic of Green Day: they are really more of a pop-punk then alt-rock band, and I do hate them (though this is biased); therefore I don't think they're anything more than mid-importance. U2 I never saw as alternative rock, but rather plain old rock to tell you the truth. NSR77 ^T_C 23:41, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

And after a quick search of iTunes (yes, despite the horrible categorization skills they possess) list U2 as 'Rock'. NSR77 ^T_C 23:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, iTunes is funny. Nirvana is also just "Rock" but when I uploaded my Pumpkins albums the category was "Alternative & Punk". By the way, anyone interested enough for me to start a separate discussion on whether or not U2 is an alternative band? I feel like that topic is the big white elephant in the room I've been ignoring for a while. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I prefer buying CD's (and vinyl's; I have a huge library of both). Often times alternative outfits are listed under "Alternative and Punk" or simply "Alternative". One can almost always categorize a band by what the actual CD genre is listed as. On the other hand, let's also add My Chemical Romance and any other bands in the "emo" pool to this growing pot, considering they do not resemble alternative music at all. Modern or not. NSR77 ^T_C 00:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

iTunes lists Yankee Hotel Foxtrot as "country". I got a kick out of that. Teemu08 (talk) 07:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

My Bloody Valentine nationality

Per the discussion at Talk:Loveless (album)#Nationality and due to various edis on MBV-related articles, we should settle on what My Bloody Valentine's nationality is. Are they British, Irish, or some unholy union? WesleyDodds (talk) 23:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Well my two cents is just to not describe the band's nationality outside the band article, where it is most relevant and where all points can be put across in line with WP:NPOV. I doubt anyone disputes that My Bloody Valentine formed in Ireland by for arguments sake three Irish kids (depends on your source) and a dual national Irish/American in 1984. However, they then went to Europe, split up and reformed in London in 1985, where they remained based for the rest of their career until their long hiatus. At this point they dropped one person of Irish nationality and added one of English nationality. So, from 1985 they were based in London, and they had two English members, and Irish member and a dual national, Irish/American. I think that's very hard to convey in a simple statement stating that Loveless was the second album by "Irish" alternative rock band My Bloody Valentine. I feel it is misleading the reader and violating NPOV to make that claim, especially given that a number of sources have described MBV as other than Irish. I'm not looking to call them a British band, they certainly aren't that either, and I agree with others that Anglo-Irish or variants of is clunky. I think the nationality of the band is amorphous, and somewhat irrelevant to articles on works by the band, and I'm simply asking that we don't use any description of nationality within the lead of articles where they can't be fully explored later in the article. I can't see a value in a long footnote to the article describing these points, and trying to represent the facts clearly would lead to something like "Dublin formed, London based". I mean, I've read interviews with Shields where he's stated that there's been four or five versions of the band, and this version of the band, to my mind the iconic version, they've certainly identified as being from London. I mean, most people consider the band Shields baby, but he's identified as Irish/American, and he's stated that without Butcher there is no MBV, and she's English, so for me it's a tough nut to crack. All I'm wondering is what we're achieving describing the band as Irish, and if any description in a lead is necessary. It's been brought to my attention that the convention is to use a nationality describer in the lead, but I'm asking if that should be true in contentious cases, which I feel this is. Hiding T 10:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it's essential to acknowledge the band's nationality in related articles beyond main band page because I realized looking at the Loveless page (currently with the nationality removed, as it should stay until the issue is settled), if the reader ended up on the page from another article or list, they might be confused at first as to where the band is from and why certain words are spelled funny. It's a small but essential point for reference and comprehension. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

To the first point I think they can go to the band article and find that out. To the second, either they know our policy on spelling and will work backwards, or they don't know our policy and it wouldn't matter anyway, they'd still wonder why words were misspelled. I simply think that WP:NPOV over-rides these issues, it is the purpose of the encyclopedia which all other policies are supposed to serve. Hiding T 11:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I would say MBV were Anglo-Irish, although it does sound a little awkward. Sounds like a good compromise, but then again, I don't know too much about them. CloudNine (talk) 12:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• FWIW, the Sire Records press release to announce the release of Loveless states "Together since 1984, this Irish-British quartet...". Hiding T 12:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• Irish-British also sounds good to me. CloudNine (talk) 12:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Request for comments on the merger of Industrial Rock and Industrial Metal

I have started a discussion at Talk:Industrial_rock#Merge on merge the 2 articles. Ridernyc (talk) 19:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)