Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music/Archive 2

Bands by last name?
I have a question I think we should decide on. Some lists of bands are organized by the performers last name, and this is often fine and dandy. However, it gets sticky with Bobby Fuller Four and Brian Setzer Orchestra (where it just looks weird) and the downright confusing issue of whether Alice Cooper and Marilyn Manson are a person or a band. The answer, of course, is both, though not necessarily at the same time. A lot of music sites put artists by their first name always (allmusic, vh1, some others) -- it could be for this reason, or because they use computers that don't know the difference when they alphabetize. What do others think? Tokerboy



I disagree with Goatasaur's assertion that a-ha and k.d. lang should be capitalized against their will, except maybe at the beginning of a sentence for clarity's sake. Of course, the title of the article has to begin with an uppercase letter, but I don't see any reason to do it in the body of articles. Tokerboy

There is prose stuff at 1983 in music, 1991 in music, 1992 in music, 1979 in music and 1977 in music.

It would be nice if we had a list of bands that do not take the. Since I'm not sure, I'll list the ones I don't think take the article as part of the name here in talk for now:


 * Googling is inconclusive: Bobby Fuller Four, Brides of Funkenstein, Dave Clark Five, Electric Prunes, Lovin' Spoonful, New York Dolls, Sex Pistols, Verve Pipe, Youngbloods
 * Googling indicated there is a the: The Fabulous Thunderbirds, The Get-Up Kids, The Jesus & Mary Chain, The New Amsterdams, The Smashing Pumpkins

I don't know if there is any way to truly confirm any of these, except maybe by e-mailing their record company or agent to see what's on the actual contract. Tuf-Kat

I don't think there's any need to list bands that do take the article on the policy page, as the list would be much too long. Bands that don't take the article are the exception, so they should be listed. Maybe a list of ones that seem like they don't take it but really do, like the Smashing Pumpkins, whom I could have sworn did not take the article (maybe that's just me). Tuf-Kat
 * Since no one complained, I removed that list.

Can anyone name a genre that is always capitalized? People seem to like doing that, so I'd like to add a little somethin-somethin to the standards listing the genres that are capitalized. The only one I can think of is New Wave (and, I suppose, No Wave), and the place-names in Chicago blues or Memphis soul -- I think there are more that are always capitalized, but can't think of them. Tuf-Kat

See XXXX in music
Question about the following:
 * Don't use piped links to the "year in music" articles (i.e. do not write "the Beatles released Please Please Me in 1963"). Instead, link to the normal year article (1963) and, sparingly use parentheses after years mentioned in the article, such as "the Beatles released Please Please Me in 1963 (see 1963 in music)".

Why is this rule here? For most music articles, it seems far more relevent to link to the *_in_music page than to the year itself. - RobLa 17:32 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)


 * heh...answered my own question. I missed the link to the Wikipedia talk:Music standards archive 1.  I'm leaving this on the page because I think this will be an FAQ - RobLa 17:42 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia talk:Timeline standards for a discussion of a "Proposal for new header". This proposal makes it less of an issue to link to 1977 instead of linking to [ 1977 in music|1977 ], since in either case, it's easy to get to the 1977 in music page. -- RobLa 06:16 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)

Non-US chart positions
Does anybody know where to find chart positions for UK, Australia, Jamaica, etc? Tuf-Kat
 * Here's a whole buncha charts:
 * And more

Neither of these are very useful. Does anybody know who does the official charts, as much as there is one, and/or know of a site that includes archives? Tuf-Kat
 * ARIA does the official charts in Australia. --Grover9 08:53, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

-

Soundtrack naming
Unless anybody complains, I will add something about soundtrack titling. They should be at Saturday Night Fever (soundtrack). There's only maybe a half-dozen soundtracks that deserve an article IMHO, but I'll add it to the list of standards unless there are qualms. Tuf-Kat

Track Listings
There was some suggestion that track listings were going to be done with MusicBrainz or some other listings site - did that get anywhere? Thinking here of Michael's contributions... Martin

Grammy
Talk on standardising Grammy pages moved to Talk:Grammy

sannse 20:40 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)

-

Similar artists lists
As I've mentioned in several places, I'd like to eliminate "similar artists" and such lists. My basic reasoning is that it's inherently POV unless you give a reason, an actual similarity, which would work better in a prose format. See Talk:Fiona Apple also. If no one complains, I will add it here. Tuf-Kat 03:58 Apr 12, 2003 (UTC)
 * Added to the main page. Tuf-Kat

The
Hmmm, interesting... judging from the list, it appears alternative hip hop groups rarely use the the. Strange... Tuf-Kat

Definitive albums
I have come up with a format I like for a list of definitive albums (see Talk: Emo for background). I have made articles currently at User:TUF-KAT/List of hip hop albums and User:TUF-KAT/List of grunge music albums and will soon move them to the article namespace if no one complains. I chose these because there is one small genre and one broad supergenre, and I think the current format works well, even though the hip hop list is superlarge in memory (do external links take lots of space?). Tuf-Kat


 * 114 kilobytes! I suppose you could move the external links to the individual album pages.  Would that work?  It would make the pages cleaner looking as well.  But on the down side, it would be splitting up useful information and possibly it would encourage the addition of albums without any justification.  Either way, the lists are impressive and look like a very useful addition. -- sannse 11:54 May 4, 2003 (UTC)


 * The best solution I had thought of to that would be to make the default page List of hip hop albums, exclusive, which might have the top twenty most-cited albums listed (plus maybe some others, like top ten most-cited albums by a woman, top ten best-selling of all time, so on) and a link to List of hip hop albums, inclusive, which would include all the links and the nitty-gritty. I decided not to do that because if people added more links to the inclusive page, the other would have to be updated as the most-cited albums change and that seemed like it might get complicated.  On third thought, now, that seems like a good idea again... Tuf-Kat


 * They look good. A nice piece of work -- sannse 15:55 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

Translations and Theme songs
What should we do with regards to foreign song title translations? Also how should we deal with series theme songs? Here was my take Theme Song Format. -- Emperorbma 23:45 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Redirects to geographical articles
I've been doing geographical music articles (e.g. Music of Cuba). Would it be useful to make redirects from subjecs which might be more likely to be searched for? (e.g. Music of San Francisco or Pashtun music redirecting to Music of California and Music of Afghanistan, respectively). Tuf-Kat 03:45, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Samples
I have made an intellectual leap forward, and am now capable of snipping a piece of a song, converting it into ogg vorbis and uploading it to Wikipedia. I have one complete (public domain) traditional Omaha Indian song from the Library of Congress at Native American music and have just uploaded four samples of songs to illustrate old school hip hop. Comments on the format, etc are welcome. A list of sound samples in the Wikipedia might be useful, so that it is easier to keep track of them ("The Message", which i uploaded, might be useful on a half-dozen pages, from Hip hop music to Music of the United States to 1982 in music -- a list would be useful for this. Aside from the ones I just uploaded and Dori's at Music of Albania, does anyone know of any others?  Is there a way to query for ogg files? Tuf-Kat 20:22, Jan 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * I ran a query and posted it at User:Dori/Queries. I haven't had time to format it yet though. Dori | Talk 21:09, Jan 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Great, I'm putting a list of the music ones on this article, at least for now. Tuf-Kat 01:17, Jan 15, 2004 (UTC)

Standard
Apparently, Lir feels there is no need to follow the albums in italics and songs in quotes standard. The page should not be changed, however, without a consensus. I feel the standard should be applied for the sake of consistency and clarity, and since it has stood quite a bit of scrutiny since added, I am assuming the consensus is to keep it. Tuf-Kat


 * There is no need to follow this "standard": Lirath Q. Pynnor
 * What do you propose instead? Hyacinth 21:02, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

An issue has been raised recently as I was working on Windowlicker. Or maybe it's "Windowlicker"? Windowlicker is a CD single, and even though it actually contains two other songs in addition to "Windowlicker", I've been told that style guidelines require referring to the title of the single in quotes, too ("Windowlicker"). I haven't been able to find such a style guideline, though, so I'm confused. Help? --LarryGilbert 15:17, 2004 Mar 1 (UTC)
 * IMO, put "Windowlicker" in quotes if you are referring to the specific song, and italicize it if you are referring to the single which includes more than one song. Tuf-Kat 16:49, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)

-

Eponymous albums
Open question: What if a band released only one album under the same name (e.g. MDFMK?) One article? Separate articles (&#91;&#91;MFDMK&#93;&#93; and &#91;&#91;MFDMK (album)&#93;&#93;)? &mdash;LarryGilbert 17:38, 2004 Mar 9 (UTC)


 * Excuse the move, I didn't want to clutter the main page with an answer. I would say one article would be best - unless there is enough to say about the band and the album to justify two articles.  If so they would be at whatever and whatever (album) .  -- sannse (talk) 17:49, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

List of albums
I just wanted to remind everyone about the list of albums article, which is supposed to contain a list of every album with an article on the pedia. I know I'm not very good about adding to it when I make a new one, but I do try to remember... It's useful to have such a list (which probably needs to be broken up, as it is quite long now). Anyway, if anybody wants to try and add more, I did a search (clicking on search, then choosing google with the only term being album) and added everything from the first 360 hits, so start with page #37 if you want to keep going at this point (it's easy -- most of the links are to band pages or edit pages). Tuf-Kat 08:05, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

Band name origins
I have an idea for a new page which I want to discuss with people before I launch it - I thought that this might be the place to discuss it with other people interested in Music, but please let me know if you think there's a more appropriate place to talk about this.

I'd like to create a page which lists the origin of 'interesting' band names. In particular, I think I'd like to list bands whose names are taken from works of literature, films, songs by other artists, etc, with a brief description of the origin of the name. Obvious examples are Mott the Hoople, Uriah Heep, Joy Division, you get the idea. I don't think it should exclude (say) ABBA, whose name may not be inspired by another cultural work, but whose origin is not obvious unless you know it.

I know this is not strictly encyclopedic, but I do think that this an interesting area to look at and its certainly of a more encyclopedic nature than (say) List_of_song_titles_phrased_as_questions, fun though that page is.

So my questions are:

Any suggestions for the name of the page?

List of bands with an interesting name - doesn't quite do it for me.

Origin of band names - better, but maybe too all-encompassing. I think that the list should not include the origin of 'obvious' bandnames like The Dave Clark 5, but I think that it should include bands like ABBA.

Any ideas?

Where are the best/ most appropriate places to 'advertise' that this page exists? Would it be appropriate to link it to List_of_song_titles_phrased_as_questions and its sister pages which are linked to at the bottom? Any other suggestions?

--Bwmodular 16:25, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Genres Project
I'd just like to announce that I have begun WikiProject Music genres. Tuf-Kat 03:52, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)

Do local/infamous bands deserve an article? Should they be mentioned in the article about their genre, or in a related article like, for instance, 'List of local metal bands'? I'm actually thinking about the genre Grindcore and the band Purulent excretor. Ukuk 21:14, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sample uploading project
If I made a WikiProject Sound samples to encourage the uploading of ogg vorbis music samples, would anyone join me? I think it'd be great if we had samples of as much as possible, but it's rather tedious and time-consuming to do in bulk. If you don't know how, it's easy -- I can walk you through on a Mac and point you in the right direction on a Windows. We could even advertise a week in which we encourage Wikipedians to do just two a day for a week, or maybe just one sample for their five favorite bands/albums/whatever -- with the number of users who probably have copious sound samples, we could really move towards having a comprehensive review of music. Any takers? (I am posting this to several project pages, please respond at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music) Tuf-Kat 22:23, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * I would possibly be interested in participating. What's the copyright situation with song samples? How long can they be? By the way, I also use a mac, and I could use your instructions. Nadavspi 22:40, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I think the details are Sound, but the gist is that fair use allows the use of short samples. No, nevermind, the details (of copyright) aren't at Sound -- they're lost somewhere... The gist is that fair use lets us use brief samples to illustrate an article.  It has been said that 20sec is a good length, though I don't entirely accept the arguments for it.  Tuf-Kat 23:37, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't think I can help, as my CDs aren't where I am (though I do have a few 12"s by British hip hop artists here), but good luck. Is bandwidth and storage space a concern for Wikipedia with all that sound? Tim Ivorson 10:05, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * In addition to bandwith and storage space, I am also concerned about quality and motivation. Why do we need sound samples? Hyacinth 20:53, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * AFAIK, bandwidth and storage are not issues. The reason we need them is that describing music is very difficult to do in any useful way.  Try describing your favorite song to someone who has never even heard of the genre.  They are also useful to illustrate aspects of genres -- see, for example alternative hip hop, which I think make the article much better by providing concrete examples rather than vague statements about "politicized lyrics" or whatever.  Tuf-Kat 01:15, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia Omnimusica
I think we oughta aim for getting publishers and readers genuinely interested in having a collection of music-related articles. I am making a list of articles which should be in at WikiProject Music/Omnimusica (which is a crappy name, but I've heard all Wikimedia project start out with stupid names). Tuf-Kat 17:40, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

Graphics
I have added some instruction to the Graphics section, including a hint from User:Opus33. However, it seems that we need some standards, or we will not be able to use images created by different users (at different times) with different settings together. For instance, I created Image:C major scale.PNG for the article Altered scale, because the preexisting Image:C maj.png would not accompany the other images I created for the article (Image:C altered scale flats.PNG). With consistent formatting beginning from the creation to the display of images Altered scale benefits greatly. As is (consistent formatting) each form of the altered scale lines up note for note with other forms and the major scale, allowing an exteremly easy note for note comparison. Hyacinth 22:51, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Somewhat off-topic: Does anyone know what's going on with rumored support for writing music in the pedia? Tuf-Kat 00:32, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

Is this a good place to put articles on bands that need NPOVing?
I'm working on cleaning up WP:LO, and there are various articles there on bands that need NPOVing. I don't know enough(nor am I interested in learning ;-)) to NPOV them myself, but this seemed like a possible place to find people who might be. Would it be OK and useful to you all if I added a section like music articles that need work to the project page and put various ones from cleanup there?  For an example, see Pink Fairies.  Please respond. Thanks for all your work! JesseW 23:44, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I think that would be lovely. Tuf-Kat 01:50, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've added various Music related items to a list on the page. Please look it over, let me know if there are any problems.  Maybe we should make a central page of Wiki Projects which accept needy articles... JesseW 02:38, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Music Collaboration of the Week
I would like to announce the introduction of the Music Collaboration of the Week, which aims to coordinate our efforts in improving a music-related article every week. Please come help us decide on the first article to be chosen! Tuf-Kat 04:39, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

What have you been listening to the last three years?
It's probably a good thing that no one's rushing to spot new musical trends for the timeline of trends in music, but surely something besides the White Stripes has happened in the last three years... Anybody have anything to add at Timeline of trends in music (2000-present)? Tuf-Kat 02:20, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

Descendent Project, WikiProject Composers
We've started a new descendent project, WikiProject Composers. This is about updating and presenting biographic information for composers in all genres and time periods (including songwriters, jazz writers, etc)&mdash;anything that falls under Category:Composers.

Feedback is welcome necessary and the project needs a lot of help to get started. This is something a lot of people have already been doing independently so at least the project page will give a place to talk about it in the broad sense. Even if you're not going to actively participate directly, you're invited to comment, proofread the project page, etc. --Sketchee 01:59, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

Vanity bands
It seems that articles on non-notable bands have begun cropping up on VfD more frequently in the last couple months. Would it be a good idea if came up with some guidelines about when a band is notable enough for an article? I'm not talking about hard and fast rules, merely some issues to consider, theoretically for people looking to write an article, though probably more practically for voters on VfD. Tuf-Kat
 * That sounds like a good idea. Vanity entries are best avoided, but I think that there should be room for acts whose popularity is only local and who haven't achieved chart success. One day I might get round to writing articles on some of those British hip hop artists who are unknown abroad. I'd like to think that such artists are worthy of inclusion. Tim Ivorson 13:57, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Here's some criteria to kick around:


 * A band (note that by band, we also mean singer, rapper, musician, orchestra, hip hop crew etc) is notable if it means any one of the following criteria:
 * Has had a Top 100 hit on any national music chart
 * Has gone on a national or international tour
 * Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the big indie labels
 * Has been prominently featured in any major music media
 * Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable
 * Has made enough money recording or performing that the member(s) live entirely off those proceeds (i.e. are a professional or full-time musician)
 * Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or local scene (or both, as in British hip hop)
 * These are off the top of my head. Additions or subtractions?  What non-notable bands would be included under these criteria?  What notable ones would be skipped? Tuf-Kat 22:52, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds pretty good. I imagine that notable artists are covered fairly well. I think that the ones who interest me are mostly full-time. Solo artists may already be covered by Criteria for inclusion of biographies (the page describes itself as semi-policy). Tim Ivorson 09:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * See WikiProject Music/Notability and Music Guidelines. Tuf-Kat
 * Note: in preparation for beginning to link to this from VfD pages, I have made a few tweaks to the above requirements (as well as introducing them on this project page). There are no really substantial changes; I was just clarifying to preempt lawyeristic arguments from someone who wants their article kept.  I've also made a shortcut from WP:NMG. Tuf-Kat 04:23, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

Categorization
I've been poking around in Category: Music lately. Looking through the categories it looks like no one's ever looked at the music article categorization from the top down and tried to impose some sort of logical structure upon it. I've been drawing out maps of possible structures&mdash;for example: possible structure of Category:Music's subcats, which a few subcats of those thrown in for illustration:

Music by nation Music awards Music education Music events concerts conferences festivals etc. Music genres Classical music Electronic music Rock music Folk music etc. Music images Music industry Music languages Music people musicians composers performers groups etc.   musicologists theorists, historians, etc.   record producers etc. Music publications music books instructional reference etc.   music journals music magazines Music schools Music technology Musical acoustics Musical instruments Musical techniques composition performance Musical works by genre (subcat of genres) by form (subcat of forms, some of which are likely subcats of genre:classical) by era (subcat of eras) Musicology Music history Music philosophy Music theory etc. Recordings and media albums by year, genre, etc.   singles videos etc.

Special subcats, by form rather than content: Music lists Music stubs

This is pretty much the top level alone, and the product of about half an hour with a doodle pad; I myself will probably change my mind a few dozen times, and it needs many eyes going over it. Is there enough interest in categorization for a WikiProject Music categorization, or is it within the scope of this one? The music categories are overall a mess, and difficult to use for anyone who browses by category (like I do); I'd like to do something about it. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 18:03, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * You list does improve on the current situation. For instance, I like Category:Music events. Hyacinth 02:49, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Sounds good so far to me. :) I like to help out sorting through these. I definitely agree that browsing by category right now is lacking.--Sketchee 20:47, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

Most of this looks like relatively minor rearrangements which I suggest you just do. For comparison purposes I've redone your structure below using actual category names and actual category links (so new categories will stand out) and added notes about the differences between this structure and the current hieracrhcy (no comment means no change). Just so that it's clear - I expect the following to be edited as needed by anyone who cares to and comments to be added to the summary section. -- Rick Block 21:16, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Summary of suggested changes

 * Add new Category:Music events as container for Category:concerts, Category:music conferences, category:Music festivals
 * Excellent idea - just do it. -- Rick Block 21:16, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Rename Category:Musical genres to Category:Music genres
 * I'm not sure there's a particular need to do this, and it would involve a significant effort. If you really want to pursue this, you should propose it on WP:CFD. -- Rick Block 21:16, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Just me being not careful noting down what was already there. Mindspillage (spill yours?)


 * Move Category:Musical groups to be below Music people
 * There are some zealots who insist all "people" categories ONLY contain individuals (see, for example, the comment in the intro to Category:Musicians), so you might want to rethink exactly where to put this category. -- Rick Block 21:16, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Hm. wasn't aware of that can of worms. Problem is Category:Musicians is an obvious subcat, and it seems unnatural to separate Category:Musical groups from that. Unless "Music people" is a bad name altogether. Mindspillage (spill yours?)


 * IMO, all extremists should be shot (which I think is from a bumper sticker). Category:Musicians should clearly be under Category:Music and should clearly include Category:Musical groups.  A group is nothing more than a collection of people, so any reasonable zealot (now there's an oxymoron) should be pacified.  "Music people" sounds a bit awkward, but I grok the concept, i.e. people associated with music - perhaps "Music professionals"? -- Rick Block 05:26, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Add new Category:Music publications as a container for books, journals, etc.
 * Go for it. -- Rick Block 21:16, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Created. Hyacinth 05:34, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Rename Category:Musical compositions as Category:Musical works and restructure subcats.
 * This one looks like a relatively huge undertaking. Is "works" that much better than "compositions"? -- Rick Block 21:16, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I like it, but indeed it's not worth the effort of changing it. In an ideal universe I would have named the cat to begin with. ;-) Mindspillage (spill yours?)


 * Add new Category:Recordings and media as a container for albums, singles, etc.
 * Fine with me, but I'll bet some folks would insist (at least some) albums are musical works. -- Rick Block 21:16, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Tough call. A few I can see, others not so much. If the album is meant as one gigantic connected composition perhaps it belongs under both. Figuring out what belongs there, now, is the hard part. Mindspillage (spill yours?)
 * Many albums are both (especially concept album), and this is no problem as (non-fundamental) categories should be in more than one category. Hyacinth 05:09, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Add new Category:Music lists
 * Not addressed yet (currently under Category:Music):
 * Category:Musical analysis
 * Subcat of Musicology?
 * Category:Musical forgery
 * Another subcat of musicology, maybe? It seems strange for this to be that high-level a category.
 * Deleted: contained one article and no subcats. Hyacinth 05:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Category:Musical form
 * Subcat of music theory, itself a subcat of musicology?
 * Category:Music occupations
 * Subcat of music people, maybe? Or eliminated altogether, unless there's some compelling reason to have it.
 * Category:Music production
 * Subcat of Music industry?
 * Category:Musical terminology
 * I'm undecided on whether this should be a subcat of something of left on its own.
 * Category:Tuning
 * Subcat of Music theory, or maybe musical acoustics: thoughts?
 * There's a historical, a practical, and a physical aspect here. This isn't so easy.  I'd be inclined to put it under music theory, myself. Antandrus 04:46, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

(as an aside, I'm not editing much lately in an attempt to actually finish that music degree, apologies for delay in replying). Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Here's a question: Do we need a Category:Music performance? Potentially a lot of things could go in it. I want to put authentic performance in a category somewhere. Ideas? Antandrus 04:46, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Category:Music by nation Category:Music awards Category:Music education Category:Music events (new category) category:concerts (currently directly under category:music) category:music conferences (new category) category:music festivals (currently directly under category:music) etc. category:Music genres (rename of Category:Musical genres) category:Classical music (currently under category:music and category:musical genres) category:Electronic music category:Rock music category:Folk music etc. Category:Music images Category:Music industry Category:Music languages (rename of Category:Musical languages?) Category:Music people category:musicians (currently directly under Category:Music) category:composers category:performers (new category?) category:Musical groups (currently directly under Category:Music) etc.   category:musicologists (currently under Category:Musicology) category:Music theorists category:Music historians (new category) etc.   category:record producers (currently under Category:Music production) etc. Category:Music publications (new category) category:music books (currently only in category:nonfiction books) category:music instruction books (new cateogry?) category:music reference books (new category?) etc.   category:music journals (currently directly under Category:Music) category:music magazines (currently only in Category:Magazines) Category:Music schools Category:Music technology (rename of Category:Musical technology?) Category:Musical acoustics (new category?) Category:Musical instruments Category:Musical techniques category:Musical composition (new category?) category:Musical performance techniques Category:Musical works (rename of Category:Musical compositions?) category:musical works by genre (subcat of genres) category:musical works by form (subcat of forms, some of which are likely subcats of genre:classical) cateogry:musical works by era (subcat of eras) Category:Musicology Category:Music history (currently directly under Category:Music) Category:Music philosophy (new category) Category:Music theory etc. Category:Recordings and media (new category) Category:albums (currently under Category:Musical compositions) by year, genre, etc.   category:singles (currently under Category:songs) category:music videos (currently directly under Category:Music) etc.

Special subcats, by form rather than content: Category:Music lists (new category) Category:Music stubs

-

Music vs Musical
What is the rationale for changing anything from "musical" to music. Hyacinth 20:51, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Not being careful at noting what was already there. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Music people
What does "music people" mean? Hyacinth 20:57, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * People involved in music, somehow. Trying to be more inclusive than just musicians/composers to include theorists, music writers, record producers, etc. Have you a better name? Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Music Collaboration
In case anybody is interested, I am reorganizing the Music Collaboration of the Week to see if it will take. Rather than working on a stub or nonexistent article (which is probably only obscure topics), it will be for improving articles on the members of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Tuf-Kat 17:23, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Music Wikiportal?
The idea of bringing Wikiportals the the English Wikipedia was proposed at the Village Pump. Would anyone be interested in starting off the Music Wikiportal?

Here's Wikiportal: Music in other languages:


 * fr:Wikipédia:Portail Musique
 * pl:Wikiportal:Muzyka
 * de:Portal Musik
 * nl:Portaal:Muziek

I'm not sure if we've decided on where to placement in the English Wikipedia. I guess following the Wikiportal/Biology example would be fine. I guess that would be best discussed at Wikipedia talk:Wikiportal? :)--Sketchee 18:09, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll cook something up at Wikiportal/Music. 19:53, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Music stubs
I think we need to come up with new stub templates under Category:Music stubs. Right now we have only. I think we need as they don't fit in with musicians and some kind of category for instrumental pieces as they don't fit in songs. That's about all I've come up with. Music is a very large stub category and there's probably a lot of material we'd be interested in going through if we can sort it out. How else can we divide all these articles? Genre, time period, nationality, music companies, bands, musicology? I'm not sure the best direction and I don't want to go about making templates yet if they won't be useful. --Sketchee 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm also not sure what the best way is; it seems like a non-trivial classification problem. Here's some ideas that come to mind for a few categories:
 * classical composition stub
 * If there's a lot, they could be subcategorized:, , , etc.
 * opera stub
 * music theory stub
 * music history stub
 * musical instrument stub
 * instrumentalist stub
 * (or subcategorize here:, , etc.
 * (or for ensembles:, , etc.
 * era stubs might be useful for general topics, like a Baroque music stub, but many of the topics that might go in this category seem categorizable another way.


 * And since that's a bit of a Eurocentric list, we could also add:
 * ,, etc.


 * Having a lot of categories for stubs isn't necessarily a bad thing; it might even be a good idea. To my mind, having a couple hundred stubs in a single category is a sign we need to refine our categorization, so I'm glad to see this topic come up. Hmmm....  Antandrus 03:12, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Raulbot, and the music list
Just thought you guys would want to know - I've been doing some work with a custom written upload script (Raulbot) on commons to upload full length songs. You can see the result at Sound/list. Those songs still need to be added to articles. Help would be appreciated. &rarr;Raul654 10:23, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Draft of Manual of Style (music)
I have started a draft of a music manual of style at Manual of Style (music). It is my intention to cover broad issues in the MoS, and leave the technical usage to this project. Let me know your opinions. – flamurai (t) 20:26, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)