Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christian music

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject Christian music (Rated Project-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian music on Wikipedia.
 Project  Quality: rating not applicable
 High  Importance: High
 

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Far and Away (band)[edit]

I'd appreciate the services (sorry, couldn't resist that) of some people who know Christian music better than I do at the above. It's an interesting case of possible false identity and socks. Peridon (talk) 21:46, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

3rd-party compilations in discographies[edit]

What is the consensus on including compilations like WOW and X Worship in discographies? See, for example, David Crowder Band#Collaboration. It seems unnecessary to me to note all the places that songs appear, as it clutters up the discography, and in this case, definitely isn't a collaborative effort (rather, the songs from various artists were just "borrowed" for the CD). Even if they were re-filed under "compilations", I would consider them to be of little added value to band articles. For now, I'm going to go ahead and clean it up, but I thought I'd mention it here just in case. --Fru1tbat (talk) 19:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The various WOW series albums out-sell almost everything else. See Christian Albums. The current WOW album has been the number one on five different occasions for a total of seven weeks. They almost always go Gold or Platinum. I think it's important to tie that in. they should be referenced, although they usually aren't in other articles either.
As a different discussion, it might be time to split out the discography into its own article. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


Compilation projects with pre-recorded songs from various artists (like WOW) I believe should not be included in an artist's discography. I also agree that those are not really "collaborations" because they are not original recordings. --Musdan77 (talk) 21:34, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Request for input in discussion forum[edit]

Given the closely linked subjects of the various religion, mythology, and philosophy groups, it seems to me that we might benefit from having some sort of regular topical discussion forum to discuss the relevant content. I have put together the beginnings of an outline for such discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/2011 meeting, and would very much appreciate the input of any interested editors. I am thinking that it might run over two months, the first of which would be to bring forward and discuss the current state of the content, and the second for perhaps some more focused discussion on what, if any, specific efforts might be taken in the near future. Any and all input is more than welcome. John Carter (talk)

Automated message by Project Messenger Bot from John Carter at 15:44, 5 April 2011

Totally awesome project[edit]

I am very happy to be a member of this project. I pray that it will turn out great day by day.--CrossTempleJay (talk) 02:01, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for discussion[edit]

Christianity in heavy metal has been nominated for deletion. Comments are welcome at the nomination page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christianity in heavy metal. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

So there's a resource....[edit]

Hello friends. I have a story to tell. Long ago, I wrote bunches of articles here, ranging from bands to eventually big topics like Christian music industry and Christian music festival. Over time while doing research for numerous articles, I realized that even where resources were already available, finding specific references inside of them was not an easy task.

For instance, if you had all 30 years of CCM magazine in front of you, you still couldn't write effectively about Andrae Crouch. Trouble is, it's too much to look through, and you don't specifically know where it is, etc. Second, While building pages like WP:CCM/S I came to realize that there were numerous smaller resources which could offer a unique perspective, but were next to impossible to find without a guide or way too wasted time. Finally, obscure topics were next to impossible to research properly. Christian ska, for instance, spend over a year in various stages of research before seeing the light of day.

What was really needed was a new resource, one that would simplify research where such sources were available. Since I have a background in programming, I figured that I could make it happen. Check out what I've been working on at the CMnexus.

Dan, the CowMan (talk) 00:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Has this project died? Dan, the CowMan (talk) 19:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
No but most WikiProjects aren't as active as they were a few years ago. I wish you good luck with your website! Royalbroil 03:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I Can Only Imagine GA review[edit]

I have nominated an article I have heavily worked on, "I Can Only Imagine", for 'good article' status. The article is ranked high-importance, and it has been up 38 days with no users reviewing it, so I was wondering of anyone here would be able to review it or at least aid in the process. Toa Nidhiki05 00:20, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I made a few changes to the article, mostly formatting, especially WP:NUMERO, but I don't have time to review it, sorry. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
That's fine, the more help the better - by the time this actually gets reviewed, it may be FA-status instead of GA, which could expedite things further. :) Toa Nidhiki05 01:44, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't think it's fair to have a member of a associated WikiProject review the file. It looks like a case of cronyism. I've seen some very shoddy GA reviews that end up getting the article failed later. 38 days isn't real bad - I know that I've waited longer. Don't worry, someone will do it eventually. Royalbroil 12:28, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Eh, alright... I just hope somebody does it soon. Toa Nidhiki05 12:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

More Beautiful You[edit]

I want you all to go and take a look at this article, which give me all the feedback you want on this page or on my talk page, and that is because I will be working on some more of your projects album articles.HotHat (talk) 23:38, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Please remove Miranda Stone Wikipedia from your list of "Christian Music"[edit]

Hello all! It appears that a few years ago, someone decided to add Miranda Stone into this data base. I would like to know how that decision was made. I am Miranda Stone, and i would not like to be included. If anyone needs proof of my identity, i would be happy to email them. I have not been actively touring for many years now, being on retreat, which also means retreat from social media and computers in general. Last week i bought a computer, got on line, and happened to see that i have a wikipedia on my name. It appears that members of this community would like to highlight my religion. I would prefer to have privacy in the area of spiritual matters. Beliefs change. I am now working with fans of my music who would like to add information to this wikipedia stub to bring an actual "history" to the last 15 years of my career. I would be happy to dialogue about the "christian music" quote that's up there now, but for the record, i don't do "christian music." I never have and i never will. While it's true that i have played coffeehouses run by churches and the like, and festivals like Cornerstone, and while i may refer to spiritual themes, that makes my music about as "christian" as bands like Over the Rhine, and Sam Phillips. I think that quite clear. If you're going to make statements about a living person, it should be based on what's true and should have a few actual quotes or references from an artist themselves. On an issue like this, those quotes should at least be recent, not something pulled from 1997. I mean no disrespect, but what a person says concerning their own faith should matter, not what you think their faith is. I apologize in advance if i'm missing protocol in this post. Not entirely fluent with the computer thing. Thanks. Miranda Stone (Earthdress (talk) 22:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC))

First, there is no database so I'm not sure where she's listed. Special:WhatLinksHere/Miranda_Stone only lists her linked from a few articles, and none of them to any Christian music lists. So if you want the the subject's article changed, you'll have to do that at the article. However, the most likely change is that the Phantom Tollbooth interview will likely simply be referenced as historical and not removed entirely. As far as I can see, she has no link to the Christian music project though. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi there Walter! Thanks for writing back! If you go to the "Miranda Stone" Wikipedia, and look into the talk pages, you will see that the page has been placed under the support(?) of the wikiproject Christian music. I would like to see that removed. I do not know how, or if, i can do that myself, but it does not make sense to have this link there since the music it is "supporting" is not "christian music." Can you look into this for me? That would be helpful. I'm not sure who made the connection, but i believe it was done without checking to see if that connection was appropriate. miranda stone (Earthdress (talk) 20:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC))

That was added by Argolin. Maybe you should ask that person (User talk:Argolin). --Musdan77 (talk) 21:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

R&R Archives[edit]

I was wondering if anyone on here has access to Radio and Records Christian chart archives dating from 1995 to mid-2003 - I want to create a FL-class discography page for Third Day, but have no first-hand chart data and definitive charting dates. If I do not have the information, I will not be able to do this. Toa Nidhiki05 17:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

archive.org has indexes of the website such as this. It looks like a lot of work but they frequently indexed it. Good luck! Royalbroil 02:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Member list[edit]

Currently your membership roster utilizes a category. Most WikiProjects have their members sign a page, with addition of a userbox optional. There are a number of benefits of having a member page, one being automatic newsletter subscriptions. If there are no objections, I'll create a member page and designate userboxes as optional. – Lionel (talk) 11:00, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps we can get some feedback one way or the other rather than assume tacit approval. Some editors may no longer be active while others may not come daily. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Let's give it another week. – Lionel (talk) 08:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Casting Crowns discography FLC[edit]

Seeing as it is getting little input, I would like to note that I have nominated the Casting Crowns discography page for featured list. Any input is welcome. Toa Nidhiki05 00:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Userboxes[edit]

Where can I find userboxes for userboxes for specific Christian music artists/bands/groups/record labels? Allen (talk) 01:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

You can start at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Music and click from there. Royalbroil 01:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Revelation FA nomination[edit]

I have nominated Third Day's album Revelation for Featured Article. If you are interested in providing input, please go to the FAC page. Toa Nidhiki05 00:48, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Mervyn_Warren[edit]

I have no doubt that this is important, but can we bring this to par? I'm more than willing to help bring this up to A or Featured.

the_undertow talk 09:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Individually, not that important. The band was important though. Not sure how you would like us to help. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

MercyMe discographies nominated[edit]

I have nominated MercyMe albums discography and MercyMe singles discography at WP:FLC; any discussion or input is welcome. Toa Nidhiki05 01:02, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Goals[edit]

Hello,

I am really like to help you with translation in French of your articles for the French Christian community.

I am already translating the article about Plus One.

Blessing,
Laurent Franky-68

2012 WikiGrail Contest winner a member of this wikiproject[edit]

USVA headstone emb-29.svg

It gives me great pleasure to announce that the winner of the 2012 WikiGrail Contest is Toa Nidhiki05. Toa's contribution to Christianity-related articles was impressive:

  • 17 Good Articles
  • 1 Featured List
  • 9 DYKs

He represented WikiProject Christian music in the competition. Congratulations, Toa. – Lionel (talk) 09:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Revelation (Third Day album) FAC[edit]

Revelation, an album by Christian rock band Third Day, is up for a second FA nomination. The article is high-importance at this project. If passed, this would be the first CCM-related article to pass FAC. If you would like to comment or !vote, you can do so here. Thanks! Toa Nidhiki05 19:02, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Inactivity[edit]

It's disappointing this project is essentially inactive... Is there any way we can modernize it and attract new members and participation? One major issue I've noticed is that many album or song articles for tagged artists do not have WikiProject Christian Music tags. That might be a good place to start - tagging more articles and assessing them. Toa Nidhiki05 02:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree. It is disappointing that this project is practically inactive. Christian music is the only "music" I listen to (except for some orchestral classical and TV/movie soundtracks). I would like to use this project to further my interest in the Christian music "scene". Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 21:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

List of 2000s Christian Songs number ones[edit]

An article that falls under the scope of this project, List of 2000s Christian Songs number ones, has been nominated for featured list. Interested members can review and comment here. Toa Nidhiki05 21:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I have commented. Royalbroil 04:34, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Requested articles?[edit]

Where on this project can I add requests for new articles? I added some to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Contemporary Christian music/Requests. However, due to the inactivity mentioned above, no one has made any attempt to fulfill the requests. To go along with the other discussion, we need to get this project up and running at full speed! Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 21:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

FAR notice[edit]

I have nominated Gregorian chant for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dana boomer (talk) 14:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

FAC for Casting Crowns[edit]

An album under the scope of this project, Casting Crowns, is up for featured article currently. The article, if passed, would be the first featured article for a Christian rock album. Any members of this project are invited to comment on the article. Toa Nidhiki05 02:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Encyclopedic articles lists[edit]

I am in the process of trying to get together lists of articles included in print reference books related to the topics covered by the various WikiProjects and groups which relate to religion and giving the relevant WikiProjects a copy of those lists of articles. I have started one relating to the broad topic of "Christian music" at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Encyclopedic articles list. I want everyone to note, however, that at least one of those sources seems to include material which is more or less specific to one song, album, or other limited period of a musical group's history under the name of the group itself, which might explain why it has articles on groups like U2 and Van Halen. However, I do think that the lists might be useful in helping establish articles on the various notable subjects related to this project and possibly providing another source for them. John Carter (talk) 20:35, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good, but it would require that an article's originator have access to that source. Royalbroil 02:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Not necessarily. First, I think it is probably useful for any project to have an idea as to what the other directly relevant reference works on a topic cover, as an indicator regarding what content we here do and do not yet have. Also, honestly, if anyone really wants some of those articles, they are free to drop me an e-mail and I can send them to the editor directly. But I've found with a lot of the other religion-related projects that there are some fairly serious gaps in the encyclopedic nature of our own content as is, and having some idea what other topics are and aren't out there can be a bit of a help in that regard. John Carter (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Vital articles[edit]

There is a discussion occuring here regarding which music articles should be deemed vital to the Wikipedia project. Your input would be appreciated. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hijacking of page[edit]

Someone "highjacked" the Out of the Grey (album) page and totally twisted it to match some other band's page. Can someone take a look to see if this is right? Thanks. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 03:06, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Reverted. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:45, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Music review websites[edit]

Okay, I want us to get it out and in the open once and for all about what websites are notable/noteworthy and reliable to take reviews from because this project has not had this discussion in quite some time, and Sources is what they came up with at that time. However, Christianity Today/ChristianityToday.com has virtually stopped doing reviews as of about the end of last year and Cornerstone quit doing if any reviews many years ago. Church Musician Today, The Church Musician, 7ball, True Tunes News are not available anymore. CCM Magazine and HM still do reviews but not many and not in every genre. When it comes to websites, Cross Rhythms and The Phantom Tollbooth do sporadic reviews at best, and are very untimely. We are basically left with just Jesus Freak Hideout off the list that does most reviews at a solid frequency. So, where exactly do we go from here. Oh, I know, which it is to consider the validity of the others in question, so lets get that started shall we. I put these in alphabetical order to show no favoritism.HotHat (talk) 07:50, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I have placed Editorial team by each one that has one.HotHat (talk) 08:12, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Christian Music Review Editorial team, they do not have a page of staff but Jay Heilman was the editor but now Daniel Edgeman is the site admin. So, they have a structure in place. The do reviews out of five or five stars.HotHat (talk) 03:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
  • CMSpin Editorial team, they have some ratings and they are usually out of ten. By the way, they do not have many current reviews.HotHat (talk) 03:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
  • New Release Tuesday Editorial team, they have ratings out of five stars, and try not to use the user name rather the real name associated with the account because they make it public on the staff page.HotHat (talk) 03:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

  • I believe the consensus is that most review sites with editorial oversight are fine. The likes of Roughstock (which I write for) and Country Universe have passed without question in the past. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 07:56, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
    • Well, I have been given heck by some editors over Christian websites that I use to write critical reception sections on here, so I want a community engagement to find out what I should and should not use.HotHat (talk) 08:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
      • So, I take it by what you write that most are usable on here for reviews.HotHat (talk) 08:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Just a note for Wiki editors: Sites such as Jesus Freak Hideout and New Release Tuesday have both staff and user reviews. Make sure that only staff reviews are used. Also, when determining which sites to use, try to use those which have more of a reputation, i.e., heavily viewed or frequently cited.--¿3family6 contribs 13:04, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Great work in compiling these sources HotHat. I would like to see links to support the editorial teams for these publications.
+1 for 3family6's comment. Returning to my first point, if the list of editorial teams would clearly show who the staff reviewers are then it would make this task easier.
I'd very much like to find CCM Magazine and Cornerstone reviews. They have reviews of older albums but very few ever made it to the Internet. We need more references of those albums. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:29, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Oh, CCM Magazine is easy to find back them from January 2000 to April 2008, just take (http://ht.salemweb.net/ccm/ccmmagazine/pdf/200709.pdf) this link and go to the YYYYMM, for the issues you want and you'll find a treasure trove of them. As for Cornerstone no more on them.HotHat (talk) 03:45, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
If you want to look at one that I found Pages (Shane & Shane album). By the way, they use grades for the really older ones and switched over to five star ratings later. Furthermore, while they were shut down they put reviews on NRT.HotHat (talk) 03:47, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Stellar work HotHat! Thanks for the additional links.
I'm thinking CCM earlier than 2000. A lot of great album articles that could use refs from back then. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Don't forget their charts as well; they were the only real CCM single charts up until around 2000 or so. Toa Nidhiki05 10:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Great work, HotHat!--¿3family6 contribs 16:40, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, three things. First, while we're at it, let's include the Christian hip hop sites Rapzilla and DaSouth. Rapzilla is the premiere of Christian hip hop coverage, with Salem Publishing using them as a source, and both Rapzilla and DaSouth have editorial teams. Each uses a five star rating system. Rapzilla tends not to review anything that they consider under a three, and average their reviews among several staff members. There also are Sphere of Hip Hop and New H2O, which I'm not sure about. They both seem to have editorial teams, and they partner with DaSouth.com. Second, many of the sources listed by both this project and by HotHat belong to Salem Communications. All of the sources that belong to this company and deal with Christian music should be listed. Third, I will try to integrate all of these reliable sources onto the source list for this project, and put a link to that page on the Wikiproject Albums source and reviewer lists (which need to be merged, by the way).--¿3family6 contribs 01:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Ah, I forgot about these: For Christian metal, you have Metal for Jesus! and The Whipping Post (this one sometimes includes rock as well as non-Christian bands. Both of these websites are personal websites by Johannes Jonsson and Matt Morrow, respectively, but both authors have written for HM Magazine, and Johannes is, or at least was, quite active in the Finno-Scandinavian Christian metal scene, heading projects such as The Metal Bible, as well as receiving citations from at least one academic (here, pgs. 6,7 and here, pgs. 149, 203, 220, 222). However, as these are personal sites, they are not reliable for BLP statements. Reviews and statements about bands are fine, but any info about the band members are not suitable. Also, articles should not rely on these sources alone, but include sources published by a third-party. This also means that other sources should take preference, but if the info cannot be gotten elsewhere (which happens often with the underground groups that Morrow deals with), they supply some excellent details. While I'm at it, Marcus Moberg, who I linked to above in support of Johannes Jonsson, did some phenomenal research of the Christian metal scene, so he would be good to include in this projects source list. There's also this PhD dissertation by Eric S. Strother. Finally, Mean Deviation by Jeff Wagner deals with progressive and experimental metal from all sorts of bands, including Christian ones. He has a fantastic section on Believer with valuable commentary on their innovation and contribution to prog metal. Sorry to throw all of this out there, but I figured we should get all of these sources out of the way at at once.--¿3family6 contribs 01:49, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

  • I agree with all that you mentioned, so go ahead and update the list of Sources.HotHat (talk) 03:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

So one last thing, I have got to tell you all about a former reviewer Jay Wright formerly of Christian Music Review, and he was the lead reviewer, well he quit doing reviews about a year ago. But, I think we ought to consider adding Jay's Musik Blog to the list, so that we can utilize his older reviews. By the way, His resume is very good and conducive to using him as a reliable source for reviews.HotHat (talk) 03:59, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Jay's Musik Blog should work as a self-published source. For Christian hip hop, Jesus Musik works as a self-published source (Houston Chronicle disclaims any oversight of it), as Sketch also writes for DaSouth.com (I also think he's written a few articles for AllHipHop).--¿3family6 contribs 01:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Further comment on Jay Wright: Many (and I mean MANY) of his reviews are reprinted in New Release Tuesday - those ARE reliable for BLP statements, as New Release Tuesday provides the editorial oversight in such cases.--¿3family6 contribs 13:19, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Who wants to sandbox these and integrate them with the others, eventually?HotHat (talk) 08:55, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I'll do it, though it might take awhile. I'm thinking to restructure the list to look more like this.--¿3family6 contribs 13:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Agreed.HotHat (talk) 21:40, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I went ahead and got it done with Music review sources, if you would like to edit go ahead and be my guest.HotHat (talk) 07:43, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Very nice! I made some edits to it, particularly to highlight self-published sources. I noticed that there is no Gospel category - is it possible for you to add one? I ask you since you researched which style each source deals with.--¿3family6 contribs 13:05, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Kellie Loder[edit]

The article about Christian musician Kellie Loder has an ongoing featured article candidacy here. Any constructive comments you would be willing to provide there would be greatly appreciated. Neelix (talk) 03:05, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Katy Hudson/Katy Perry[edit]

Could project members please look at the copy at Katy Hudson. I don't want my bias to be imposed on the article, but the wording is odd to my eyes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:52, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

This is an American album so date format definitely needs to be the format December 28, 2013. It was a Contemporary Christian album as that was her format at the time. I like the lead as is. Why doesn't the article refer to her as Hudson not Perry since that was her name at the time of the album release? Other than that, the article looks like GA quality to me. Royalbroil 01:22, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
She was going by her birth name at the time of the release. She has since switched to a stage name subsequently. Could a few editors read over the copy since the editor has stated that English is not a primary language. I found a few issues with wording. I'm sure that there are more. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
The article clearly states that she's Perry now. But it's wrong to call her by her stage name Perry throughout the article when it was released under the real name Hudson. Except when the content is about what she did in the future (like tours). I didn't see awkward wording but having more eyes looking for awkward wording is helpful. Royalbroil 01:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Take a look now. I worked on it a bit.--¿3family6 contribs 03:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Awkward wording: "Hudson utilized primarily Christian rock and Contemporary Christian music in the songs' composition" and "Perry exploring Christian rock and contemporary Christian music (CCM). Amongst what was described as an alternative direction were prominent influences of pop rock and soft rock." It's starting to look better now though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you all for fixing my errors. Though, an editor changed AllMusic to Allmusic, which is wrong, the actual name nowadays is AllMusic. Plus, can we remove the citation in the lead for the sales figures? Per WP:CITELEAD, I think we should, plus the information is supported in the Commercial performance section of the album, and contains a reference. Prism 12:05, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Is Magnificat a song?[edit]

There is a discussion at Talk:Magnificat#Italics about whether or not the Magnificat is a song as described in the Manual of Style, and as such should be in quote marks. The same question seems to apply to Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, Te Deum, and probably others. Opinions would be appreciated. Thank you. SchreiberBike talk 19:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

IMO, it is both a song and text. Considering there is written music (by dozens of composers), when one of these is being referred to it should obviously be italicized. When just the text is being referred to, it shouldn't be. Overall point is that in many cases, Magnificat should be in italics and I think that holds for any musical arrangement whose text is pulled out of the Bible or any other source. Ckruschke (talk) 17:29, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Ckruschke

Two recent additions need some reviews[edit]

I encountered some controversial material in two articles over the past two days. The first was at Jesus Culture and some criticism levied at a song they performed by John F. MacArthur during his recent "Strange Fire" conference. The vitriol spewed by the initial editor after I removed the material made me think twice and I created a criticism section that I hope does justice to MacArthur's opinion without giving too great a platform for that opinion.

The other issue is related to a new editor's additions at Bizzle related to a recently released controversial song. The editor in question made extensive quotes at first and when I reverted the material in an attempt to maintain WP:NOV and WP:NOR I started getting messages from the editor. I attempted to advise the editor but seeing the result, I don't think I was particularly successful.

Both of these additions need eyes and reviewers, and I would rather have editors who are familiar with the field do that rather than call on others who may not be as familiar. This does not mean I expect the reviewers to take sides only that they may be able to offer a more balanced approach to editing, particularly of the second song.

Back to MacArthur and this conference for a second. He believes, along with many others, that the gifts of the Holy Spirit stopped either when the first apostles died or when the canon of scripture was closed or at least was completed. To them, all forms of charismaticism are un-Christian. That was the focus of the conference and they used this song, along with many other things, to prove that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:23, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Walter - the content that is currently on the Bizzle site looks fine to me. It looks to evenly go over the "Same Love" issue and controversy. Seems like alot of words about the issue, specifically the long explanation about the song, but since the song was just released that is natural.Ckruschke (talk) 18:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Ckruschke
Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Desperation Band albums[edit]

I just looked at the album articles related to Desperation Band. No references. They have reviews at http://jesusfreakhideout.com/artists/DesperationBand.asp and I'm sure there are others. I don't have time to determine which are notable and which aren't. Could someone take a look? Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update[edit]

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 04:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject Christian Music At Wikimania 2014[edit]

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 16:31, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Hillsong album notability[edit]

There are a number of albums linked from list of Hillsong albums that are clearly not notable. I started looking for RSes to support notability for a few of the albums and I PRODed them. I stopped checking after a while and just PRODed any that didn't clearly list notability. An editor has been de-PRODing them while linking to sources that don't support it. So if a few editors could look for sources and dePROD if you find any good ones. If it's gone to AfD, list what you've found. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:36, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying us of this, a lot of those albums apparently charted, so most of them were dePRODed by Shaidar cuebiyar to make sure that we aren't deleting anything notable. I've started looking through a lot of these noms myself.--¿3family6 contribs 15:41, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
There were more than forty and some of those were tagged with notability, unreferenced or refimprove tags. Most of them are still not notable though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:06, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

The articles on Hillsong's early albums have been very informative. Particularly for the albums that are out of print. I honestly think that they should be kept up as a reference. They've been very helpful to me. I am not the author of said articles. I did remove the notices on three of the articles, "Spirit And Truth", "Show Your Glory", and the United EP "One" as it stated that the articles would be removed within seven days. I think these deletion proposals should be discussed more before taking the articles down. Jair Crawford (talk) 17:39, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Their usefulness is not an issue. The informative value that they present is not a criteria. Their notability is. See above. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Well, if the articles do become deleted, the least we can do is make sure the information does not get lost as it's merged into a more general article, or whatever the result ends up being. I started a discussion on the talk page of the Notability page as well, as I am curious as to why notability is being considered more important than potential usefulness of the information. Also, I want to apologize if I ended up removing any notices prematurely. You can probably tell, but I'm pretty new to this editing thing. I've been a long time reader though. Jair Crawford (talk) 22:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Sure. You mean the track listings? That's possible. The images cannot be saved though.
You're in your right to remove the AfDs though. It makes the process more difficult though. If the AfDs are closed as delete, that's usually the end of it although an article could be recreated if new sources are found. If they're closed as keep, then that is usually the end of it, unless notability guidelines change. There has been some discussion about charting notability. Does appearing on the Billboard 200 mean an album is notable or should it be on the chart for two weeks? Thinks like that. However, the AfD could be closed as no consensus and then I could always just redirect it to the Hillsong article or a band article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:32, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Saving the track listings, and if possible the personnel information, would be great. Shame about the album art. Old and rare albums from otherwise popular artists have been a point of interest for me, which is why I find such information from articles like the "Show Your Glory" album to be so informative. The information is pretty accurate, but due to the nature of the album, most of the information would have to be from more personal sources rather than external articles. But that is probably better discussed on the Notability talk page. Thanks for the clarification on the AfDs I removed. Jair Crawford (talk) 22:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
It would require using {{Discography list}} and I haven't looked at the template for a while. It supports the following parameters:
| Type = "Studio/EP/Live/Compilation/...", see codes below
| Name = "Name" or "Name" (album or EP/single)
| Other info = added between parentheses after Name (album or EP)
| from Album = ONLY FOR EP/SINGLE: added after Name
| Released = "1992" or "11 February 1992
| Format = "LP/CD/..."
| Label = "Name" or "Name", comma if many
| Writer = "Songwriter name" or "Songwriter name"
| Writers = Use if there are multiple writers, comma if many
| Producer = "Producer name" or "Producer name", comma if many
| Director = "Director name" or "Director name" for music videos
| Chart position = "No. 1 U.S." or "No. 12 UK" or such
| Sales = "3 million sold as of 2005" or such
| Certification = "Gold" or such
| Tracks = " "One", "Two", "Three" ", etc.
| Bonus tracks = "Four" (Japan edition)
| Singles = " "Single", "Other Single" ", etc.
So songwriters would be covered, but not performers. Take a look at White Heart discography for a poor example of how it can be used. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the info. I'll make sure to check it out. In the meantime, if you're interested in getting involved, I've started a discussion about notability in music on the music notability talk page. I would do a hyperlink, but I'm a newb and don't know how to put it in here. Also, I did vote for weak keep on some of the albums that are AfD'd. I hope I did that correctly. Jair Crawford (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Delete or keep[edit]

I'll start by apologizing if any albums that really are notable, based on current criteria, are deleted, but the nice thing is that there's an easy way to deal with those. First, create a draft copy in your user space. Second, be certain that there are a sufficient number of sources to confer notability on the subject are present. Third, ask for a review of the draft. The review can be done here or of the larger community. If it passes the review, we can move the article into main space.

However, if the article is kept based on weak sources, it makes it much more difficult to nominate for deletion in the future. Another nomination would either have to wait for a change in criteria or would have to allow a significant amount of time between nominations (I would complain if it were less than two years).

So if in doubt, vote delete and work on a new article. Better yet, nominate for weak delete and request the article be moved to your user space while you continue to research.

Again, sorry if notable albums are deleted. Many of the albums were created a long time ago and had no references and I couldn't find any for the first few. I made the mistake that they were all like that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:39, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I want to say, thank you for bringing these albums to the table. All of them needed a lot of work, even the notable ones.--¿3family6 contribs 03:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome, and I would say especially the notable ones! I think, however, I’ll bring this sort of thing here first and tag the articles with a notability and some sort of references tag first. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:07, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Even the deletion discussion is good. It was the mass PRODs that caused a problem, as it was too many for people to respond to.--¿3family6 contribs 14:40, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. I won't do the mass PRODs again. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Or only when I have a day free to research, as I did yesterday and this morning.--¿3family6 contribs 17:16, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Coordinating schedules may not be that easy though.... Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The Ongoing Concept[edit]

Would someone care to discuss genres at The Ongoing Concept? Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Cross Rhythms[edit]

Just wanting to know more about how to cite their rating on Wikipedia?AdditionSubtraction (talk) 10:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:42, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Most places use stars, however they use black and white boxes.AdditionSubtraction (talk) 16:34, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

An editor created this template to use: 8/10 squares {{rating|8|10|full=U+25A0.svg|empty=Solid white borderedS.svg|rating=square}} --¿3family6 contribs 22:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thank you, for the assistance you provided.AdditionSubtraction (talk) 05:55, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome.--¿3family6 contribs 23:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

First American Contemporary Christian music radio station[edit]

Is it true that Los Angeles was the first market to have a station of this format, with KYMS 106.3? 173.51.123.97 (talk) 01:07, 23 July 2014 (UTC)