This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Metal This page is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal

Archives

2012: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2019: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2020: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2021: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2022: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Archive 1, 2006, February – February 2007 Archive 2, 2007, January – April Archive 3, 2007, April – July Archive 4, 2007, July – September Archive 5, 2007, September – March 2008 Archive 6, 2008, February – March Archive 7, 2008, March – April Archive 8, 2008, April – June Archive 9, 2008, July – February 2009 Archive 10, 2009, March – November Archive 11, 2009, November – April 2010 Archive 12, 2010, April – August Archive 13, 2010, August – February 2011 Archive 14, 2011, merging of 2012 in progress...

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Let Go (KMFDM album) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let Go (KMFDM album) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Jax 0677 (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:What the Dead Men Say (album)#Requested move 3 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at Talk:Kiss (band) regarding the digital avatars and the band's activity. Some opinions would be helpful for this discussion which can be located at Talk:Kiss (band)#Digital avatars and band activity discussion. Thanks. HorrorLover555 (talk) 16:18, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sunbather (album)#Requested move 24 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Neo Purgatorio (talk) 04:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aerosmith has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 19:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kekal has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bleeding Through has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

Something interesting and personal I'd like to note: from what I can tell, this article is the last surviving A-Class music-related article before the rules were changed, and I think that it would be cool to have this preserved as a piece of Wikipedia's history and a bitter shame to lose it. (Unless someone would want to take it to FA one day, of course.) But I can't do this one alone, would anyone be willing to help me repair it? mftp dan ^oops 23:49, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently an ongoing discussion at Talk:Iron Maiden regarding the status of a band member who had retired from touring. Some opinions would be helpful for this discussion which can be located at Talk:Iron Maiden#Recent edit warring regarding band membership. Thanks. HorrorLover555 (talk) 18:05, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, I have nominated this article at FAC. Any and all feedback would be welcome. My hope is to get this promoted before Spiritbox releases their second album on March 7. This would be the project's first FA since 2020. Much appreciated, mftp dan ^oops 16:45, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone. As already mentioned several times before, there's a long list of members yet the project is still semi-active. I'm looking to find people who are still active in the project to put their signatures on the Active Users subpage. I'm interested in hopefully reviving the project, especially because there are a large amount of metal-related articles in disrepair. If you're interested, please sign at the page and we can hopefully bring the project back to activity. If there are no new signators by the end of the month, I will be marking the project as inactive. Thank you for reading.

—Sparkle and Fade ^talk_edits 02:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Number of the Beast (album) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Talk:Beast In Black currently ongoing regarding the band's nationality, and could use some opinions to see if a consensus can be reached. The topic is Talk:Beast In Black#Finnish?. Thanks. HorrorLover555 (talk) 15:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! If anyone reading this is familiar with this band's sound, the genre of this band has been a somewhat perennial problem, though less so in recent years. I am inviting all interested parties to partake in a talk page discussion regarding a good-faith proposal to make a change to the genre parameter, rather than one editor acting unilaterally. Deftones is too complicated for such boldness. Thanks, mftp dan ^oops 15:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike other projects, WikiProject Metal does not have a proper importance rating yet. I think an importance rating and assessment would benefit the project, letting us know which articles are of higher priority to the project, and also aiding the WP:1.0 team. See also Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version Criteria#Priority of topic. While it will take some time to fully integrate the importance rating (about a week to a month) into the project, I don't think it will take too much work to implement. However, I want to ask for consensus first over whether or not this is a good idea. If you have any questions, please reply and let me know. Thanks. —Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 22:58, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a great idea to me.★Trekker (talk) 03:53, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I never really saw all the hooplah Wikipedia puts on this parameter. I'm pretty sure the project used to have one, if I remember correctly, and we got rid of it. How would these levels be determined for each article? mftp dan ^oops 04:27, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on what you mean by "levels". Generally, the top-importance ones are "Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopedia" according to the 1.0 team, something like the super influential bands (Metallica, Black Sabbath, Mötley Crüe) as well as vital genres and other articles (NWOBHM, thrash metal, and heavy metal subculture.) Examples of high importance articles would be Slayer, Master of Puppets, First-wave black metal, etc., but this is where ratings can start being debatable due to the rating's subjectiveness. Generally, Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version Criteria#Priority of topic is likely the best place to consult how to rate for importance. —Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 05:41, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This very subjectiveness is what I'm concerned about when it comes to adding an importance scale. Plus, what does it really do for the project? Does anyone actually find it useful for any reason? I never really did. mftp dan ^oops 17:07, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right about the subjectiveness on the importance scale, and how it can be problematic. Quoting Wikipedia:The deadline is now#What if the article isn't that important?, (...) If an article has been written at all, then its subject is important to somebody. However, I think the reason the importance scale is on a lot of projects is because it serves as what "priority" the article is, despite the project's demand to make all of the articles well-made right now, e.g. Iron Maiden would be a high priority, informally taking precedence over something like Terrorizer, although its mostly arbitrary since editors can freely choose to work on whatever topic they want. You make a fair point and I won't argue against it, although other editors have expressed support for the idea. I'm staying neutral on this. —Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 01:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you've summarized my thoughts on it before I even went and fleshed it out. Thank you. In conclusion, if I may now bravely dissent, I'm not really for it, I'm not sure it really serves any useful purpose. I could have sworn we used one before and got rid of it for that same reason I'm thinking about, but it is possible I could be thinking of another project. mftp dan ^oops 06:03, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Considering your thoughts on the proposal, I'm likely to withdraw on my proposal and drop the idea of the importance rating. Thanks for your input. —Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 06:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is something I can support. :) Yes, I agree with having an importance rating. HorrorLover555 (talk) 06:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]