Talk:List of noise musicians/Archive 1

old comments
There seems to be a lot of anon IPs and single-entry users contributing to this list. They usually add a single, non-notable artist. I'm proposing that we revert these addditions, and clean-up the list in general. Any opinions? Cnwb 05:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I've been considering bringing this up myself. I'm typically pretty inclusionist, but this page is becoming useless as legitimate entries get buried in the spam avalanche.  My only worry when it comes to cleaning it out is that it would be difficult finding someone knowledgeable enough about noise music to do it without wiping out the stuff that should be listed here.  It's a fairly arcane area of knowledge, and after seeing people sending articles for groups like Incapacitants to VfD,  I'm a little wary of people taking scissors to noise music stuff.  MrBook 13:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe we could start with a Google test, or discogs.com test (which gets into some pretty obscure material). We could each start at one end, and work through the list until we meet (if that makes sense). Take the Z entries, for instance - Zbigniew Karkowski definitely stays, but I'd say ditch Zherji. Cnwb 03:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * We should also remember that removing items from this list isn't the same as deleting articles. If we concentrate on red-links, we should be fairly safe. Cnwb 03:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * While we're on the subject, please see my comment below. A link goes to an article that has nothing to do with the band itself. -,-~ R 'lyeh R isin g  ~-,- 21:21, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Nyarlathotep
An anon user keeps adding the following to the Nyarlathotep article (which has nothing to do with bands, by the way): Nyarlathotep-A desert noise cult who's namesake has convicted some to create "loathsome sounds from beyond". I noticed that an entry for "Nyarlathotep" appears in the list, but other than the cryptic sentence above (which keeps getting added to the top of the Nyarlathotep article), I have no idea if it is notable or not. Does anyone know anything about this band? -,-~ R 'lyeh R isin g  ~-,- 21:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Discogs.com lists two projects callled Nyarlathotep, and each only have one song on one compilation. One is on Static Landscapes Vol. 1, the other on In Search Of Weird Truth... . Therefore, I'd say they're not notable enough for inclusion, and thus I've removed the link. Cnwb 22:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

New proposal to clean up list
Seeing as this list is still attracting an influx of redlinks, usually to non-notable artists, I'm proposing to delete all redlinks, and maintain this policy as new redlinks are added. If the artist is notable enough, it's easy to create a quick stub, such as I did when I wanted to add Omit. I'll leave this message for a week to allow for discussion. Cnwb 08:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Not really my area, but since you brought up the subject of redlinks (and while I'm here)... IMHO redlinks are a scourge, especially in cases where the chance for expansion is very small, such as for obscure topics. In my realm of Wikipedia, I've taken great strides toward exterminating them with extreme prejudice! (Well, actually, I usually just turn them into "plain text", i.e., remove brackets). Perhaps these redlinks could simply be hidden with the notation? until someone decides to expand them. -,-~  R 'lyeh R isin g  ~-,- 12:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I... agree. I thought the Google test proposal was a good one as well, but I put off replying to it because I didn't want to sign up and then, through a deadly combination of busyness and laziness, not be able to follow through.  The redlink-purge idea is a lot less intimidating.  I disagree with RR in that I see redlinks as a to-do list rather than a scourge, but as a to-do list this list is no longer useful.  I vote everybody write down what they want to make the "real" list and then... flush.  MrBook 22:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * We could even put the list up for AfD, seeing as the same job could be done a lot better with a Category. Cnwb 02:56, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Richard Ramirez
I've created a new article for Richard Ramirez, and I opted to disambiguate it as "Richard Ramirez (musician)" instead of "Richard Ramirez (noisician)." I typically try to address the aesthetic difference between "noise" and "music" (not a pet cause of mine, but it is of a lot of people in the noise scene) and the inherent paradox in phrases like "noise music," etc., but in this context I tend to think more generalized phrasing is better, especially considering many people reading the article might be new to (ahem) noise music. MrBook 18:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Negativland
An anonymous user has added Negativland to the list. Personally, I wouldn't consider Negativland to be noise music. Should we remove it? What do others think? Cnwb 01:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Going by the broad definition of noise in the Noise music article, I would vote a weak keep (as with a number of entries on this list). They have their "musical" moments, but noise seems like a better label for them than any other I can think of.  MrBook 13:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I and many others would consider Negativland Musique concrète, certainly not noise, hope that helps.

WikiStuffs (talk) 08:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Still a mess
This list is still a mess. I was thinking it was getting better from all the attention it was getting, but I just finished removing a bunch of redlinks and non-notables, as well as links that go to unrelated articles (i.e. a link for a group called, say, "Serial Killer" goes to the article for serial killers), and there seems to be no end in sight. I voted to keep when this came up for deletion a few months back, but I'm starting to have second thoughts, because people just can't seem to keep themselves from adding advertising for their own bands to the list. What's even more depressing is that when you look at the links that actually go to a page for the artist referenced, quite often the articles are poorly written, unwikified articles for decidedly non-notable bands that somehow avoided being deleted... and then I think about the articles for Incapacitants and the Haters that got slapped with a Speedy Delete tag within two minutes of creation, and I start doubting the sense of this whole goofy endeavor. Not just this list... the whole of Wikipedia. Scratch a cynic.

Anyway, I was considering changing the wording in the intro to read "The following is a list of notable noise musicians and bands" (with the italics left out in the actual article intro). It wouldn't stop anybody from stuffing the list full of spam, but it might discourage them from re-adding it after it's removed. Thoughts, anybody? MrBook 15:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

FIRST OFF,Anyone who talks about 'notable' noise artists doesn't know anything about the scene; the best work in this field is by obscure figures. The problem with this list is that it's cluttered with composers, jazz improvisers, experimentalists, rock bands and dance music groups. Since these aren't noise artists, I've cleaned it up a bit...


 * Trust me, I know plenty about the scene. The notability talk refers not to the scene, but to the nature of Wikipedia.  I'm all for the underground ethic, but it's not really relevant in a general-interest enclyclopedia (even one as inclusive as this one).  The encyclopedia don't care, nor should it.  The rock and dance bands are a problem with this list (good edits, btw, at least to the list), but not as big a problem as the spam.  MrBook 18:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

FINE, but I really think this list should concern itself with noise artists exclusively--someone put Coil, Negativland, Stockhausen, Melt Banana etc. back on the list, and none of these are noise artists. There's a separate page for Noise rock, industrial dance, performance art etc; these people belong there.


 * Some of those artists could probably be left off, but you did go a little crazy with the deletions. Coil?  Their dancy stuff obviously doesn't fit, but their abstract stuff is well within the broader definition of noise put forth in the article the list is attached to.  Don't even get me started on Otomo Yoshihide.   If you're talking about strictly harsh noise, there is an article on that here, and creating a list to go along with that that could be a good idea if you wanna keep it "pure."  Go nuts.  MrBook 13:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

COIL's harshest stuff still isn't quite noise, it's ambient. Yoshihide's an improv turntablist. I think just tossing together everyone who uses a bit of noise is misleading and inaccurate and anyway, what purpose could it serve? A separate page for harsh noise strikes me as redundant when you already have sections covering Noise rock, improv, etc... ~

To the anonymous user who is part of this conversation. Could you please end your comments with ~. This adds an automatic signature, so we can keep track of who is saying what. Also, when you remove names from the list, could you please write something in the Edit Summary, so we know why you're deleting them. Thanks. Cnwb 23:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

There has always been two problems with this list - 1) the influx of non-notable artists, and 2) semantics (or, definitions).

As for non-notables, I agree that an inherent aspect of this genre is the fact that a lot of work is done by lesser-known artists, but Wikipedia has some well-established guidelines as to what artists can be included. Unfortunately, a lot of lesser-known noise artists don't fit into these guidelines. I've created entries which have then been slapped with Speedies, and in some cases, I've just had to grit my teeth and bear it.

As for definitions; this article does not clearly establish what noise music is. It could include any artists who has used "noise" in their music. This would include many avant-garde composers, free-jazz, rock music, industrial music, electronica, and so on. We could attempt to come up with a definative definition, but who are we to decide? Cnwb 23:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

OH, well, I've been deleting all the performance artists, dance groups, composers, jazz improvisers and rock groups from the list: Coil, NWW, Stockhausen, Costes, Melt Banana etc. etc. are not noise artists and don't belong here. Just because someone uses some noise doesn't make them a noise artist; most of these people belong in Noise rock, ambient/experimental, performance, etc. A noise artist is someone like Masami Akita, Maurizio Bianchi, Prurient. Who are we to decide? I've been involved in this scene since '85 and am happy to edit this list for you, as per your request. ~


 * You are really making a mess of this place. Can't you at least look around and see how the place is constructed before you start knocking down walls and putting doors in the ceiling?  I've created a List of harsh noise musicians page, and moved to it all the artists that you for some reason added to the harsh noise article.  Also, I'm re-entering the artists that you keep deleting from the List of noise musicians.  Please remember that this is an encyclopedia, and not the place for scene-purist ax-grinding.  The request for knowledgeable editors was to help separate artists who are worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia from non-notable bands self-entered by people who can't grasp that this is not MySpace -- not to arbitrate for everybody what is or is not noise.  As Cnwb points out, that is too amorphous and ill-defined to be pinned down accurately enough for an encyclopedia, no matter how long you've been in the scene.  MrBook 15:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


 * P.S. You need to remove all the bracketed "nowiki" stuff from around your signature or it won't work.  Just the four ~s.  MrBook 15:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't follow you, the list you've come up with is a laughable mess; a list of noise artists should obviously be limited to those who are noise artists. If you just include anyone and everyone who uses a bit of noise here and there, the list is imprecise. It's also spam bait, since people seeing it will think, sure, and where's Pink Floyd, then? Spike Jones? The Sex Pistols? And on and on... Thanks for straightening out the Harsh Noise list, in any case...83.81.205.192 15:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

red links
I'd like to change this list to include only noise musicians with WP articles (so no red links). Anyone mind if I do that? Cheers, Doctormatt 23:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * There has been no response to my query, so I will now make the change. Doctormatt 20:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I just found out about WP:SELF, so I've changed the wording to simply "notable" noise musicians. Practically speaking, notability can only really be established via a WP article (what "me, too!" editor is going to provide multiple, independent references in a list?), though we, of course, will evaluate additions on a case by case basis.  Doctormatt 00:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge List_of_harsh_noise_musicians
I think it would be a good idea to merge List_of_harsh_noise_musicians into this article. The lists have a lot in common, and indeed, one should be a subset of the other. But "harsh noise" is so vaguely defined, and harsh noise is such a poor article at the moment, that I think it is better not to have that list. If there are no serious objections, I'll merge them this week. Doctormatt 18:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I did the merge. Doctormatt 02:52, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Noise musicians
use this category instead of the manually edited list

Hi, would I be welcome to contriute here? I have good knowledge of noise music, particularly UK noise. I noticed my inclusion of Filthy Turd keeps being deleted, he is a prolific and much talked about artist, due in no small part to his harsh noise music and wild live shows. If you are from the UK, and like noise music, but aren't aware of, or have not seen Filthy Turd play a show, you can't be that knowledgable a noise fan (sorry, if that causes offence). And no, I'm not Filthy Turd, but I do play noise, though won't be plugging my own project here. Completely disagree with the Filthy Turd ommision though, I imagine if I make a dedicated page, it'll soon be deleted cos he's 'not notable enough' ie hasn't released his noise on a major label subsidary, appeared in Wire magazine or is in an off shoot of Throbbing Gristle. Thurston Moore championed him in the NME! He knows...

WikiStuffs (talk) 22:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * As I tried get across to you on your talk page, this is a list of "notable" noise artists, which means they need to have their own article. I'm not trying to discourage you from contributing here, just pointing out the relevant guidelines. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Although an amazing band, I wouldn't call the Liars noise music. Perhaps the list should feature, as well as notable artists, artists who have a significant output of noise material. Or clarify the Liars listing with what albums/EPs would be considered noise music as in Lou Reed's Metal Machine Music?

How about Le Scrambled Debutante??? Arent they worthy and noteable enough??? Zippysam (talk) 05:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiStuffs (talk) 07:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

OK for list of Japanese noise musicians to have red links...
But mine are speedily deleted. I have been given the reason by mods (artists not having a dedicated Wiki page), but it seems ok to do this if they are Japanese. A tad hypocritical I think. Any feedback on this? Pun intended :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiStuffs (talk • contribs) 08:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and remove all red links. See WP:VERIFY for supporting arguments.  Cheers, Doctormatt (talk) 06:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)