Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Meshuggah


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 20:39, 20 January 2009.

Meshuggah

 * Nominator(s):   LYKANTROP    ✉  

This article is about a Swedish band. I'm nominating it because I think it meets the FA criteria.  LYKANTROP    ✉  02:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Oppose on criterion 3 - All sound clips need separate fair use rationales for the Meshuggah article. They currently have fair use rationales for "Metallica". Also, each clip should be justified using a very specific explanation. For example, the "Choirs of Devastation" fair use rationale could say something about the "angular" riffing and double bass drumming mentioned in the article. Awadewit (talk) 01:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I have tried to fix all the problems you mentioned. The "Metallica" fair use rationales were a mistake - I used one Metallica sample as a template and missed that heading. I have added the appropriate information to all of them and rewrote better summaries as well.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  13:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * There are four fair use audio clips in this article. I am not really competent to judge whether all four of them are necessary. I would appreciate it if some editors who have some knowledge of this style of music assess the necessity of these clips. I am more capable of assessing the value of Mozart clips. :) Otherwise, all images have verifiable licenses and adequate descriptions. Awadewit (talk) 01:37, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your comments! I believe that 4 clips are competent...--  LYKANTROP    ✉  12:51, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The point is that we need an independent assessment. Awadewit (talk) 17:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments

Everything else looks amazing to me. I like how you've got a runthrough of every album in the Musical Style section. I'd also like to add that "Cadaverous Mastication" is my favorite song from them and that the drumming in "Bleed" owns everyone in the face. :P If those minor things are taken care of or explained, I'd be happy to support. Burningclean [speak]  01:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "In the early 1999, Meshuggah joined Slayer on its US tour" That sentence looks funny with 'the' as the second word. Maybe change to just 'In early 1999'?...
 * "The album Nothing was released in August 2002,[21] selling 6,525 copies during its first week in the US and reaching No. 165 on the Billboard 200." In the lead, instead of being No., it is №. I think it should be more consistant through the article, choosing just one variation for the whole article.
 * There are very few references in the first paragraph of the 'Music genre and typical traits' section. Is there some kind of deal with that, or could more be added?
 * Just as a question, why are so many references in the Footnotes section rather than the article.
 * Thanks for your comments! The footnotes have been created after several editors told me, that the amount of sources in some sentences is a huge problem for the readability of the article. The problem was that some sentences had like 15 sources, often 5 sources one after another. This was not easy to read. Or for instance the sentence from footnote "e" has 1-2 sources every third to fifth word, which doesn't look very nice in the article as well. So I used the special footnotes, rather than just deleting good sources...
 * Now I reordered the footnotes: I've put some of the sources back to the article body, where it was possible and reasonable. I've also split the long footnote (first paragraph of the 'Music genre and typical traits') to 4 separated footnotes. This makes the sourcing of the paragraph much more transparent.
 * I also fixed the other things you mentioned. So I hope that's it...--  LYKANTROP    ✉  14:51, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Support :D Burningclean  [speak]  21:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for telling me about the mistakes and for the support!--  LYKANTROP    ✉  22:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Support — Article is very strong in terms of content and sourcing. Nothing appears to be missing. However, I feel that there may be too many images. I've always found that less is more when it comes to photographs in featured articles, especially when it comes to music biographies. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 06:17, 10 January 2009 (UTC))
 * Thanks a lot! I removed one image of the band on a show. Now there is just one image for each member.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  12:51, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I specifically asked reviewers to weigh in on the necessity of all four audio clips (per WP:NFC above. I would appreciate your opinion, especially if you have any knowledge in this area. Awadewit (talk) 17:52, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Support, the article meets WP:FACR. Canniba loki  13:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I specifically asked reviewers to weigh in on the necessity of all four audio clips (per WP:NFC above. I would appreciate your opinion, especially if you have any knowledge in this area. Awadewit (talk) 17:52, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment. With respect to the four clips that Awadewit suggested reviewers comment on, my reaction is that the first one ("Choirs of Devastation") is too long -- the guitar technique is very clear from just the first ten seconds. At a short length such as ten seconds I think this is acceptable fair use. The second one is problematic because you never define what a "breath controller" device does, or what the listener should hear. If you can give a sourced description that makes it clear what the listener is identifying via the use of the clip, then it might be fair use. The third one is again too long -- once the lyrics start it's hard to focus on the guitar, and even harder to justify fair use. I'd chop just before the lyrics, and you could probably cut a bit from the start too -- there's a change in tempo at around 7 seconds, so you might run it from there to the lyrics. I think it's a stretch to say that "slow tempo" enhances the listener's understanding, though; does a reader who listens to that really understand what you meant to say more? That is, does it "significantly increase readers' understanding"? Hard for me to see how it does. For the first clip, I felt I understood what the article meant by "angular" once I listened to it, so that seems OK; the second one might be OK once you explain what a "breath controller" is; but this is a stretch. For the fourth clip I also have doubts -- I understand what "spectacular" means without the clip; all I get from the clip is what the band actually sounds like, and I have that with clips one and two. I don't think this clip really improved my understanding. So I'd oppose clips three and four, but I think one is OK and two may be salvaged. Mike Christie (talk) 00:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * When I was choosing the clips, I tried to act accoring to WP:NFC, which says "Music clips may be used to identify a musical style, group,"...etc. and of course as you mentioned to "significantly increase readers' understanding". The breaking points of Meshuggah's career are 3 albums: 1995 Destroy Erase Improve (clip 2), 2002 Nothing (clip 3) and Obzen (clip 3). With DEI the band attracted its first worldwide attention (in the scene of this kind of music). With 2002's Nothing (clip 3), the band completely changed their musical approach and made their biggest breakthrough in their style ever. The clip number 1 from 91's album is NOT an example of their fast style of 95 DEI or 98's Chaosphere (for which there is no clip - clip number 2 is a guitar solo). And the change is not about the speed, but also about a completely different downtuned sound. This album also led popular Rolling Stone magazine to give Meshuggah the first review. The clip number 4 is from their latest album, which sold twice as much copies as the band's yet best selling record and represents the song, which became the trademark of the album and the new trademark of the band, for which the band has become known for much more mainstream heavy metal scene. Every journalist mentioned especially this song in his review.
 * It maight seem contradictious to your suggestion but if I should remove the clips one after another, I would definitely abandon the clip 1 at first. This is an example of their earlier work when they were unknown. As the most important I see the clip number 3. Since that album the band is know for their downtuned sound, which is represented by this song. But it also gives an example of their vocals, which are mentioned in the article as well as a tempo change and a polyrhythm (their typical musical traits). I can't say whether clip 2 or 4 is more important. Clip 2 stands for the whole soloing of the band, which plays a huge role in their music and has been countlessly mentioned by journalists and is completely unique (in terms of heavy metal of course. Jazz scene is something different). Clip 4 represents simply what the band is now. Both of them absolutely "significantly increase readers' understanding". Without clip 2, it is like the band didn't have any lead guitarist and solos at all. And to remove the clip number 4 means to get stuck in 2002.
 * Removal of the clip 1 seems to me the only one, which would not really "damage" the article. So I'll remove that one...--  LYKANTROP    ✉  02:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the thorough response. I'll go through and have another think about it; and I agree that the note in NFC that music clips can be "used to identify a musical style, group" is relevant.  (It also gives a limit of 30 seconds, so perhaps I was being too strict with 10 seconds.)  However, it would be helpful if you could give some indication for those of us without any understanding of musical theory just what you mean by "downtuned".  It seems you might also argue that the "Straws Pulled at Random" clip is "iconic", to use NFC's word; but it would be nice to have some understanding of this in the article.  And how about "breath controller"?  Any more info on that? Mike Christie (talk) 02:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The term "downtuned" is about Musical tuning. Normal guitar (6 strings) is typically tuned to E, A, D, G, B, E tones. "Tuning" is pitching an instrument to the level you want it to be. Meshuggah uses custom made 8 string guitars. In addition to the normal 6 they have 2 extra low strings. 7th string is a B♭. It is a B which is dropped half a note down (dropped half a note down=♭). The string number eight is a F♯, and it is basically a string from a bass guitar, which gives the guitar completely different sound. Except for this, since 02 Nothing, the band plays all their songs in general dropped half a note down. This information is from an interview with the guitarists (link) It is a little bit complicated if the reader does not have a knowledge of the musical theory, so I think it is unnecessary to explain the whole think in the article. I tried to explain this in the article using third-party sources. I actually "let the sources decide", what is enough or too much for an avarage reader. So I used "eight string guitars for Thordendal and Hagström, with two extra low strings" (link, see paragraph 11) as a mainstream source says it, rather than explaining every single string as it is in an interview. The "downtuned" is ment to be just a little bit more exact term for "low" as it is said for instance here: "lower tempos and massive, downtuned riffs played on eight-string guitars"(link, see praragraph 2) and here: "explore the depths of the lowest registers possible" (from the same "pragraph 11" as above) or "ultra-low, subwoofer-rattling"(link, see paragraph 4). I don't think that there is a need of an in-depth analysis in the article if the journalists do not make one.
 * About the song "Straws Pulled at Random" being iconinc - for example in popmatters.com review of the album, this song is chosen as a video sample below the text as well, because it features most of the typical traits. A time change and afterwards a polyrhythm and an example of vocals. It contains also the most "memorable" and most typical "slow and low" riffs from the album. This seems the best song to give all these features in 30 seconds.
 * The breath controller is small box where the guitarist blows in during the solo. It creates a smooth, almost saxophone-like sound for the guitar. I did't find any reliable information more than that it is used "most famously on the opening track "Future Breed Machine"" (link, see parag. 3). I've seen him using it on some videos (example here) and live shows. But the sample in the article is first of all an example for the guitar solos by Meshuggah (which are totally unusual for this music genre), not the "breath controller" device. I used this solo becasue it is a the most famous Meshuggah solo and in addition there is the breath controller. I fixed the description of the sample, which was a bit misleading and also specified the sample of "Straws Pulled at Random".--  LYKANTROP    ✉  11:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You've convinced me that the "Future Bleed Machine" and "Straws Pulled at Random" clips are fine as they are. It's a pity there's no better description of the breath controller, but if that's an issue I'll leave it those reviewing the whole article.  For "Straws Pulled at Random", I take your point about the details on the tuning being too much for a reader, but how about putting that into a footnote, with the source given in the footnote too?  Up to you, though; I don't think it's necessary -- just an idea.  For "Bleed", can you tell me what the reasoning is behind including it? Mike Christie (talk) 12:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Bleed" is from obZen, their lates album (March 2008). With this album, Meshuggah attrached much bigger audience than they've ever did. Their yet best selling album Nothing sold since 2002 until now about 80,000 copies while obZen sold 50,000 in 6 months after the release. The band also gained much more media attention (sources are in the article). The song "Bleed" is in fact totally iconic, what is explained by such statements: "(...) On highlights like "Bleed," all those elements blend together into one mammoth percussive instrument." (Rolling Stone) or "What's most remarkable is the live drum kit work by Haake. He's constant and startling -- the completely crazy bass pedal work on "Bleed" would leave most drummers in the dust." (Allmusic, he says "live drum kit" because Meshuggah used computer programmed drums for their previous album). This song is actually what they've become known for in the mainstream audience of this scene.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  17:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I think that does it. The three you have look OK to me now.  Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! I hope that my English was not a pain to read :)--  LYKANTROP    ✉  22:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Source discussion carried forward from FAC archive 2:

Comments - sourcing is mostly addressed. The last few concerns from the previous FAC, have been addressed by the nominator at an exchange on my talk page User talk:Ealdgyth. I post that so other reviewers can evaluate the situation for themselves. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The last two concerns that were discussed are:
 * Rockdetector - specifically this text. The sources I provided about this source are listed here.
 * Fuzz.com - specifically this text. The Fuzz.com "about us" is only what we have about this source. The page says that the artists can promote themselves on the website, but nothing more explicit. Although the source contains useful information, I prepared for the case if it will be considered as non-acceptable and I sourced most of its information with other sources. Only 2 statements about festival shows would have to be deleted.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  18:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Just a note that I'm not watchlisting this FAC, we're at the stage where it is up to other reviewers to decide for themselves on the sources. I'll add that on the Fuzz stuff, having it backed by other sources is a help. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Rockdetector seems reliable enough for me, as there are a number of websites and news stories that mention it. I'm somewhat skeptical about the Fuzz one, though. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  15:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought the same as well. Fuzz.com has been completely removed from the article.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  11:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Fuzz.com has been removed from the article several months ago. For Rockdetector I posted sources such as this or this from Blabbermouth.net (hosted by Roadrunner Records). I also asked for a feedback on the noticeboard and and recieved a positive answer.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  15:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments from I supported this in a couple of the previous FACs, but I want to look at this article with a fresh eye again before supporting.
 * The new audio fair use rationales look good.
 * ", while other times the band performed with two guitars, often with Hagström using a pitch shifter to play his guitar at an octave lower than usual." The noun + -ing sentence structure is awkward, try this: ", while other times the band performed with two guitars—in this setup (lineup?), Hagström would use a pitch shifter to play his guitar at an octave lower than usual.
 * " Meanwhile, Nuclear Blast re-released Contradictions Collapse with the addition of songs from the None EP."
 * The quotation in this section is awkward and choppy: "Nick Terry of Decibel Magazine describes the album as a four-movement symphony.[56] Some songs still use Meshuggah's "familiar template combining harsh vocals and nightmarish melodies over coarse, mechanically advancing, oddball tempos"[40] but with the addition of "ambient sounds and quieter dynamics".[40] "The first third of Catch Thirtythree centers around two simple riffs.""
 * "Except when Hagström needs a soloist"-->Except for when Hagström needs a soloist
 * "His lyrical inspirations are derived also from books and films."
 * See WP:CAPTION, image captions that are not complete sentences should not have periods. "Frontman Jens Kidman in 2007." is not a complete sentence. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:05, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments! I think it is all fixed now. I integrated some of those quotations into the text, where a quotation was not neccessary. It seems to be done.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  18:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.