Talk:Control (Garbage song)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
industrial & electronic source quote
Source: [1], quote > "Control," "Big Bright World" and "Blood For Poppies," which continue in the group's tradition of blending the best of the alternative era with plenty of electronic and industrial elements" ...hence genres of all three songs:
- The full quote from source linked above: "The set is stacked heavily with recent tunes like "Control," "Big Bright World" and "Blood For Poppies," which continue in the group's tradition of blending the best of the alternative era with plenty of electronic and industrial elements." So where are you getting all the "rock" from? The source doesn't cite Alternative rock, electronic rock, or industrial rock. They state alternative "era" (does Garbage encapsulate the entire alternative "era"?) with electronic and industrial "elements". That source doesn't properly suggest anything you're trying to ascribe to it. I'm reverting those edits once again. Try to find a better, less ambiguous source. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:52, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- You're unnecessarily nitpicking. The source clearly categorizes those three songs as alternative, electronic, and industrial. Even modifies it with "plenty of" for industrial and electronic. 'Rock' is inherent and a given from the classifications; talk) 01:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)]
- You're unnecessarily nitpicking. The source clearly categorizes those three songs as alternative, electronic, and industrial. Even modifies it with "plenty of" for industrial and electronic. 'Rock' is inherent and a given from the classifications;
- Having "elements" of a genre, does not make it part of the genre. You can put that in the prose, but in the infobox, it's not clear to readers. Do not add it there. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:12, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
- "plenty of elements" is in the quote. Where does it say such wording is not notable, or is that merely your subjective view?--talk) 19:13, 27 October 2014 (UTC)]
- And I'd like to note to talk) 19:16, 27 October 2014 (UTC)]
- That's funny. If you'll look at my edit history I've done it with Dan56 once and someone else who said nothing. Try assuming stick to the source. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2014 (UTC)]
- What? That is not assuming good faith, I linked to a relevant Wiki article detailing what Canvassing, not made it up or was aggressive toward you. It should not be done in the future is my point. You employ an inventive sense of what 'attacking' is; apologies if you consider that being attacked. talk) 20:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)]
- Elements is vague and should not be interpreted as a genre. In other words, seeing it listed in an infobox, it's not immediately obvious to a user that these are just referring to "elements" of some other genres. You can use it in the prose, but it would misguide a user to place it in the infobox. Apologies if i'm mixing up arguements, I've got a couple talk pages balancing out in my head from various talk pages. Oi. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
- No problem. I understand what you're saying, with respect to the infobox. But I think I'd like to get some sort of consensus on that view (with respect to the infobox) through a RfC. I'll initiate it in a bit. I will add the text to the prose then. --talk) 22:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)]
- No problem. I understand what you're saying, with respect to the infobox. But I think I'd like to get some sort of consensus on that view (with respect to the infobox) through a RfC. I'll initiate it in a bit. I will add the text to the prose then. --
- Elements is vague and should not be interpreted as a genre. In other words, seeing it listed in an infobox, it's not immediately obvious to a user that these are just referring to "elements" of some other genres. You can use it in the prose, but it would misguide a user to place it in the infobox. Apologies if i'm mixing up arguements, I've got a couple talk pages balancing out in my head from various talk pages. Oi. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
- What? That is not assuming good faith, I linked to a relevant Wiki article detailing what Canvassing, not made it up or was aggressive toward you. It should not be done in the future is my point. You employ an inventive sense of what 'attacking' is; apologies if you consider that being attacked.
- That's funny. If you'll look at my edit history I've done it with Dan56 once and someone else who said nothing. Try assuming
- "plenty of elements" is in the quote. Where does it say such wording is not notable, or is that merely your subjective view?--
Off-topic
|
---|
|
RfC: Interpretation of source quote
As introduced in the above section, the quote from the source: "Control," "Big Bright World" and "Blood For Poppies," which continue in the group's tradition of blending the best of the alternative era with plenty of electronic and industrial elements" . Source states "alternative rockers" in the preceding text, and in the aforementioned quote, describes the three songs as alternative with significant electronic and industrial elements, thereby classifying the three songs as alternative, electronic, and industrial (saying they continue in the group's tradition of blending/incorporating such genres). It is disputed above that the quote is not significant and can't be used cite those genres next to alternative.--
- Alternative seems good enough. Infoboxes are generally for a minimalistic overview. The article body can discuss influences, how a band's sound has developed or stayed true, and so on. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:25, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
- Of course. I'd just think since the other two genres are used in the context of alternative, in the context of "blending" such genres, that they are significant enough therefore warrant inclusion next to alternative. Thanks for your input. --talk) 04:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)]
- Of course. I'd just think since the other two genres are used in the context of alternative, in the context of "blending" such genres, that they are significant enough therefore warrant inclusion next to alternative. Thanks for your input. --