Misplaced Pages

Talk:Contemporary Christian music: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 07:49, 21 January 2013 editWalter Görlitz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers294,571 edits →Jon Gibson and others: response← Previous edit Latest revision as of 23:06, 17 September 2024 edit undoSilverLocust (talk | contribs)Administrators24,830 editsm SilverLocust moved page Talk:Inspirational pop to Talk:Contemporary Christian music: Revert undiscussed move (WP:RMUM): WP:COMMONNAME 
(171 intermediate revisions by 43 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Music/Music genres task force}}
{{WikiProject Christian music |importance=top }}
{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Pop music|importance=mid}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 130K |maxarchivesize = 130K
|counter = 2 |counter = 2
|minthreadsleft = 4 |minthreadsleft = 5
|minthreadstoarchive = 2 |minthreadstoarchive = 2
|algo = old(90d) |algo = old(180d)
|archive = Talk:Contemporary Christian music/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Contemporary Christian music/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
Line 14: Line 21:
|date=January 20, 2005 |date=January 20, 2005
|url=http://www.ocolly.com/new_ocollycom/show_story.php?a_id=24802}} |url=http://www.ocolly.com/new_ocollycom/show_story.php?a_id=24802}}

{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{Archives |search=yes |bot=Lowercase sigmabot III |age=180 |units=days |index=/Archive index }}
{{WikiProject Music/Music genres task force|class=b}}
{{WikiProject Christian music |class=B |importance=top
|Contemporary Christian-work-group=yes }}
}}
{{Archives |search=yes |bot=MiszaBot I |age=3 |units=months |index=/Archive index }}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes |target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes
}} }}


== The Catholic guitar mass ==
== Evie ==
There is a tension within Misplaced Pages as to whether the music of the Catholic guitar mass should be included in this topic. This current article mentions nothing of guitar masses, Ray Repp, the St. Louis Jesuits, or any modern music for the Catholic mass (Carey Landry, etc). And yet, the Misplaced Pages article on Ray Repp says that his 1965 album "Mass for Young Americans" represented some of the earliest stirrings of Christian contemporary music. This problem is somewhat analogous to how the Misplaced Pages article on "Christian Colleges" tends not to consider Catholic colleges as Christian colleges. It is somewhat insulting to Catholics that they are implied not to be Christians. Thus it is really hard to decide whether modern Catholic music pioneers like Repp and the SL Jesuits should be included in this article. --] (]) 21:59, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

: How is there tension over the subject? I don't recall anyone trying to add it. Also, you did not point to a discussion happening about it elsewhere. It seems that it would be more appropriate to include it in the ] article, or possibly in the article on ]. I'm not sure why ] is not a good location to discuss it though. The contemporary Christian music genre is not an umbrella genre for other genres though. It's essentially the Christian version of pop music.
Admitted that Evie didn't belong in the list with Larry Norman, Randy Stonehill, and Andre Crouch. But in her own way, she was a precurser to Jesus music, and by recording songs by Larry Norman and others helped build a bridge between the largely "counter-culture" Jesus Music genre and the "legitimate" Gospel industry. Also, her stuff sounded trite to me at the time, but the company was positioning her to compete with people like Dionne Warwick and Petula Clark, not Grace Slick. No, there's not room in the article as it stands now. . . .
: I'm sorry that protestants are treating Roman Catholics poorly on the ]s article. Granted, Roman Catholics have caused a few problems elsewhere by claiming the term "Catholic" for only themselves. ] (]) 05:57, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
] (]) 20:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
::Sorry, I came here to discuss in good faith, not bicker. If you want to discuss with mutual respect, I'm fine with that, but I'm not going to bicker. --] (]) 04:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
] (]) 20:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
: Yes. She should be mentioned. She was the top-seller in the late 70s before Amy Grant took over. --] (]) 21:05, 9 March 2012 (UTC) ::: I did not realize there was bickering. I was pointing out that you did not point to where this tension was created and existed. I then tried to explain where a better location for this topic was in hopes that you would explain why you felt that a guitar mass should be discussed here. I also tried to explain why some editors might take umbrage with with Roman Catholics, but I apparently created some of my own. If you actually want to discuss, feel free to. ] (]) 04:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

== History Chronology ==

Would it be helpful to break the history into periods, and align the artists listed with those periods?

'''Pre-Jesus music''' - Ralph Carmichael, camp-meeting songs like "we are One in the Spirit" (approx 1964-1969)

'''Jesus music''' - Early Larry Norman and Andrae Crouch and a host of artists that recorded and toured outside the "Gospel Music" industry, such as John Fischer, Love Song, Randy Stonehill, Honeytree, etc. (Plus maybe a note that Evie, an industry-supported musician who was NOT a member of the Jesus Movement, showed her support by recording songs by Larry Norman and others who could not get played on Christian radio) . . . . . (approx 1969-1974)

'''Early Commercial CCM''' - When Gospel labels finally started to take notice - 2nd Chapter of Acts, Keith Green, Randy Matthews . . . (approx. 1974-1981)

'''Mainstream CCM''' - When "secular labels" started to notice and invest heavily in CCM, and promoted Christian acts into mainstream channels - Amy Grant, Michael W. Smith, D.C. Talk, Jars of Clay, Stephen Curtis Chapman, Avalon, etc., (approx. 1981-2000, when recession caused some retrenching in the industry)

'''Worship-fueled CCM''' - A rising interest in contemporary worship fuels growth of artists with a worship emphasis, as well as encouraging mainstream CCM artists to release worship albums. Paul Baloche, Chris Tomlin, Matt Redman, Jerem Camp. (approx 1995-today)
Yes there was overlap, plus there were many artists whose careers spanned two or more of the above cycles. Some Jesus musicians like Honeytree managed to stay around long enough to draw some advantage from the early commercial CCM momentum, and other groups like Petra managed to stay alive from the earliest days until CCM went mainstream. But a breakdown like this gives a much clearer view of the growth of CCM than a monolithic listing of artists who would never have shared the same stage, either from chronological or philosophical reasons.

Whatcha think?
] (]) 10:46, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

: Sure, but the last category isn't accurate. It's only one branch of modern CCM. There are many CCM bands that don't include worship and there are many earlier Jesus Music and early CCM acts that included worship music on their albums and in-concert. The trend should be mentioned but it's not an era that I can see. A better division might be the takeover era of CMM, where mainstream labels started buying the smaller CCM labels which would be 1980 to the present. --] (]) 14:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

::True the secular takeover of the "Christian" music industry continues to have consequences, such as Sony's purchase of Benson, which gives them control over catalogs of Zondervan, and many others. But in the recession of the early 2000s, the big secular companies retrenched and dumped many artists at the same time. The assumption was that the growth potential for "Christian" music has plateaued, and the market was saturated. In spite of breakthrough hits like "I Can Only Imagine," the largest growth area of Christian music since then has been Worship. I've seen figures that support that, but I can't track them down at the moment. Maybe the best approach would be to say that the last decade saw a greater proportional emphasis on Worship music. (P.S. as a worship leader for some fourteen years, from the late 1980s to early 2000s, I'm well aware of the contributions that Jesus Music and early-to-mid CCM made to our worship catalog, as well as how it kept groups like Petra going when they'd apparently run out of other material. It just didn't wasn't as large, proportionately as it is today.)
] (]) 11:35, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

== Very much a US phenomenon ==

While secular styles of American pop music have become hugely popular pretty much all over the world, it seems to me that CCM is still pretty much an American phenomenon with fairly little takeup outside the US, including majority-Christian countries. The exception being of course those types of Christianity that are American in origin. For example in central Europe, Pentecostalists (which are relatively few people) and such will listen to and promote CCM but "your Grandmother's style" Christians, such as "normal" Lutherans and Catholics, will not even know it, even when they're young and fairly active in the Church. We have our own modern Christian music but it is a very non-commercial affair; it's more like folk music and the usual way of experiencing it is singing it yourself from faded out xeroxed note sheets with maybe an acoustic guitar playing along.

If you can word this better it might make sense to include this information. Currently the article is very US centric. -- ] (]) 04:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

: I think that's very much opinion rather than fact. CCM is very much prevalent here in the UK for example - there are a number of CCM radio stations and let's not forget that ] achieved some significant chart successes in the UK as well as being very popular abroad. ] (]) 07:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
:: Shall we do an inventory of non-American CCM artists? There are very few. Yes, there are Newsboys, who have relocated to the US and now only have one Australian musician. Same thing with Rebeca St. James. There are other Australian artists. Canadian artists and I have a number of UK artists in my collection as well. Sweden made a big hit in the late 80s and early 90s. I have one German album from the 80s and two current artists. One from South Africa who have subsequently disbanded. However, my collection is about 10:1 American (despite living in Canada). We should add information about CCM in other nations, but not give it ]. --] (]) 14:48, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
:::See ], some of the artists are in CCM style. ] (])
::::There's already a very good inventory of CCM artists at , and while it includes several US artists there are an awful lot of others in there too. I do agree with you though that the article as it stands is very US-centric and needs a more global perspective. ] (]) 07:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
::::: Removed the tag. Feel free to improve it, but the tag is not necessary as explained above. --] (]) 13:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

== Updated artists ==

I removed the majority listed and took the top artists from ]. I also kept Steven Curtis Chapman, Amy Grant, Jars of Clay and Michael W. Smith because they were key to the industry in the 80s and 90s. If we would like to add others, please suggest criteria to do so. Avalon, BarlowGirl, David Crowder Band, Rebecca St. James and Third Day were removed in the process, although it wouldn't take much to convince me to restore Third Day to the list. --] (]) 22:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
:Agree with all changes except removing Third Day. ''Move'' didn't have a number one it had two top-ten singles and stayed on the charts over a year; even still the band's 08 album ''Revelation'' was a hit and they've have multiple number ones on the CS chart. I'd keep Chapman as a main artist, though: he isn't as big as he once was but he is still very relevant, producing No. 1 and No. 2 albums along with top five and top ten singles. I'm also not sure Aaron Shust belongs - while "My Savior My God" and "My Hope Is In You" were massive he hasn't had much success otherwise and his last two albums barely even charted on the Christian Albums chart. I'd suggest ] as a replacement - they've had six top-five singles on Christian Songs (their last two went number one and the number-two peaking "By Your Side" was number three on the decade-end chart) and have had two top forty albums on the Billboard 200.
:As for the historic section, I'd suggest adding ]. They were the biggest Christian act of the 90s in terms of album sales and would have followed up in the 2000s if they hadn't had disbanded. '''] ]''' 23:25, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
:: See. I told you that it wouldn't take much to convince me to add Third Day. Adding dc Talk is also reasonable. --] (]) 04:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
:::Hah, yep. I'm surprised at how different the CCM scene is as compared to back then... The only artists that are still big that were around in the 90s are Third Day, tobyMac, and Newsboys. The only 80s guy that is still big is SCC and even he is slipping lately. '''] ]''' 03:01, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
::::I'm surprised there's no mention of ] anywhere in the article. They were by far the biggest CCM band in the UK in the 90's and early 2000s, as well as being very successful in other countries. ''']''''']'' 10:14, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
::::: Were they CCM, Christian rock or modern worship? Not much more rock than Third Day though. Regardless, you do understand the criteria for updating the artists in the first section. They did not meet the criteria. We don't really discuss the state of the industry outside of the United States, and we should mention it. --] (]) 14:53, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
::::::The best thing they have going for inclusion is they had multiple top 20 hits in the UK. Come to think of it, Newsboys and Hillsong could also go in an international section despite the fact all have crossed over to the US and the Newsboys are practically American at this point with Tait as the lead singer. '''] ]''' 15:17, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
::::::: Only the drummer, Duncan Phillips, in the four-man band is Austrialian. The other three are American. --] (]) 15:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
::::::::Yeah, that's what I'm saying, the Newsboys aren't Australian at this point. '''] ]''' 15:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

== Jon Gibson and others ==
I couldn't believe ] wasn't mentioned in the history of CCM with all his accomplishments/influences as well as others who would openly write songs about God/Jesus: ] ("Have a Talk with God" is just one example of many), ] ("Make it Happen" and others), ] (needs no explanation, his article gives many examples if you're not familiar but I'll just type "Pray" as one), etc. Van Morrison and U2 and Bob Dylan are great examples. The Fray? Even though I own some of their music, I'm not familiar with their connection with "Christianity" and it's not as common knowledge in my opinion... nevertheless, the others I mentioned should stay in case someone is considering reverting my "good faith" contributions. If there are ANY questions, please discuss here first before creating an edit war or attempting to monopolize the content. I thought it necessary to type this section just in case. P.s. This article could use a lot more info (background). Perhaps one day I will work on it. For instance: ] and ], ], ], ] (original/new Gaithers), ], ], ] (who also "crossed-over" and had videos air on MTV), etc. etc. At least the Imperials are listed . Thanks! ] (]) 02:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

FYI: CCM is not a "white-only" genre and isn't a "southern gospel/music" genre. CONTEMPORARY is also pop, hip-hop, r&b, country, jazz, dance and rock if it's mainstream and popular. It was an alternative to secular music with the same style/sound but with christian lyrics. ] (and The Family or God's Property) is a good example in the late 90s with their cross-over hit "Stomp". Or another hit called "Lean on Me" (including Bono of U2, R. Kelly, Crystal Lewis, etc.) among others. Many urban acts aren't even mentioned as CCM. The Tennesse-based comment should be cited/sourced. ] (]) 02:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Others would be ] (considered secular) and ] (CCM pioneer). ] (]) 09:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


== New section - Rejection of the label ==
:I reverted the edit (before I saw this -- though that doesn't matter) because it isn't according to the source given (the same goes for my second edit). You can re-add any if you supply reliable verifiable source(s). --] (]) 23:31, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


A number of bands have made high-profile rejections of the CCM label. I think that's significant for this article, in part because these usually include discussions of the meaning and significance of being labelled as "Contemporary Christian music". I'm thinking of, eg. ] and ]. ] (]) 14:32, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
::They're legitimate examples per the articles they connect to but I'm going to add more details in a different context, instead of along with those already given within the pre-existing sentences/subject. Perhaps I'll create a whole entire section just for them and others I mentioned above with sources. Therefore, I'll go ahead and expand the article as I had planned to later. Thanks for the revert actually, I prefer to be more specific with my next entry (even though I think the exclusion of my edit was unnecessary). To be continued... ] (]) 00:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
: What did you have in mind? ] (]) 18:49, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
:Went ahead and added this. Due to the ] policy, I'm not sure how much discussion we can put in, but the artists' own words are citable. ] (]) 03:35, 4 October 2023 (UTC)


== "Stylistically-rooted in Christian Music?" ==
::Completed/resolved. Please discuss before making any changes (which I don't think is necessary). Most if not all is already contained/expanded within the musician's articles. Thanks! ] (]) 03:03, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


Thoughts:
:::OK, a few different problems with your edits: First and foremost, you only used external links instead of inline citations, which is not only incorrect, it just looks a mess. The sources also need to corroborate with what the text is saying. Your first paragraph should not be the beginning of the section; it should be merged with the third paragraph. And GVB didn't start until the '80s, so they couldn't "pave the way" for the genre. Also, this is not a place for a list of artists. As you can see on this page, and in the archives, as well as the hidden text above the lead, this article has had a history of debating on which ones should be included. So, we've had enough problems with the one in the lead. Adding more lists just adds more problems. And one more thing, the word "eventually" is too vague. It needs to be more specific (with source). I will wait a while and give you a change to make improvements before taking any action. --] (]) 05:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
One, I have no idea what that definitively means, and neither do you, especially "stylistically."
Two, considering this topic is "contemporary Christian music" and given that term's typical usage, is there any reason the "stylistically-rooted" note shouldn't read "in pop/rock music?" <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 12:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: ]. ] (]) 06:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


== Style and Artists ==
:: "Wait awhile"? What if I didn't get back on for a few days? There needs to be a consensus, not an edit war between you and I. Having the info added is fine. It's not incorrect. And I also do references that way and they get cleaned up later by bot or whoever. It is NOT a reason to remove or "take action". The sources do coincide with the text (ie. Kirk Franklin honored by CCM is a source I added although didn't elaborate on within the section), please take the time to read them if in doubt or the actual articles of the artist which already mention the info typed. The section required expansion and diversity. The first paragraph precedes the later-dated info as a better intro. If there are a few word choices that could be changed/improved, that's one thing, but to revert everything is inappropriate and not "policy". There needs to be others involved. A concensus is required, not just your impression/opinions (with all due respect and without any offense). And you may want to read my edit summaries. Please do not make this something more complicated. I just didn't go listing people and not provide appropriate "facts". You seem to be cherry-picking. The guidelines you posted on my talk page that I'm already familiar with is something you may want to review about the process as well. If the references need cleaning up, or some words changed/improved, by all means assist. I am also working on it gradually as able (not on your time-table). I can give more info about the artists after their name, HOWEVER, this article isn't about them and should have limited info about them. That is why it links to their articles. Not supposed to go into details about something the reader can learn more about on their articles. You don't "build up" or "put down" anything about anyone within a related article. It's not like I listed everyone, I gave influential musicians within the genre. Thanks and have a good night! P.S. I'm not sitting here watching what you have to say every minute of the day. Until I return, the info can stay. If others disagree or agree as well, please contribute to this discussion. Sorry if this "changes" the way you or others want the article to be, but is not Wiki's objective. These "good faith" edits are by all means legit. ] (]) 06:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


The list of artists is severly out of date, including Third Day (which has now disbanded), Aaron Shust who hasn't released any popular music in a while, and under the historically part, Newsboys, who recently released an album, and has never disbanded. I think one band that should definatly be included is For King and Country, who is the one of the most popular artists in the genre. They have won grammys for their work, and just overall should be apart of this list. ] (]) 21:28, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
:: Just to be clear, I did not add both uses of "eventually" to the section but have fixed it. ] (]) 06:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


== “Propaganda” ==
:: Your well-intended argument is that editors can't just list random acts/artists/bands/musicians within the article. I get that. However, that is NOT what I did. I created different sections/topics with context. This is very unproductive/unwarranted and so I will leave it as is for now and make improvements as I see necessary and have time. I can also work on the source/reference formats later perhaps, it's just not something I can devote time to at the moment. By all means, feel free to fix them. God forbid. (smile) Nonetheless, my effort complies with Wiki for the most part. Our time could be better spent in my opinion. Peace! :) P.S. GVB was just an effort to mention the "parent" Gaithers in general (per sources), but it has been corrected. Thanks for your understanding/cooperation. ] (]) 07:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


This is a pretty exceptionally poor wording. Referring to a genre as “propaganda” seems about as silly as saying that ] is Satanist propaganda, or that ] is liberal propaganda. I’m actually baffled this has been included - it’s beyond unencyclopedic. '''] ]''' 18:38, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
::: Sorry I missed the party. The issue isn't whether Gibson should or shouldn't be listed, it's whether there's a reliable source to support it. He had a lot of singles, bit I don't believe it was 22. Find a source to support it. --] (]) 07:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
:I don't see where the genre is called propaganda; at least not in the lead which summarizes the article. ] (]) 01:16, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


Agreed, the phrase is inflammatory, the VICE article that is cited contains the statement "contemporary Christian music (CCM) has often functioned as a propaganda wing of the Christian right." But that isn't what the article is about, the thesis statement for the article is "Queer musicians say the industry is facing a spiritual crisis: Adapt to a new generation of listeners, or die." While the article is using inflammatory language, such as "propaganda", "spiritual crisis", and "adapt or die", it isn't doing so to prove those points. It is using the language to explain contrasting ideas in the ]. The current criticism section lists several opponents to CCM within conservative circles, so I don't see how they could see it as a propaganda arm. ] (]) 02:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
:It is on his article already! As are other cites that verify this. That cite is from his actual website. Go to his article and view ALL the sources. You are making mistakes here. You don't remove it all, you discuss. You can prove it isn't true. It is according to Billboard and Gospel awards. And all the other info is fine, you don't remove everything... You just want to monopolize it, because that is the only other explanation since the info is legit. IE. Kirk Franklin and Winans and Gaithers, etc. Find it hard to believe you read all those cites or took the time to read the related articles. Seems you just want to revert people's work you don't like? Your actions are inappropriate. We need to have other editors involved to "arbitrate" since you will continue to revert to get your way. You have something against Gibson and all the rest? This isn't the place to smother facts/truth. ] (]) 07:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
:: What's in this article already? A link to an Amazon.com listing of a book: http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Contemporary-Christian-Music-Worship/dp/0313344256
:: A list of albums? http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/cms_content/1324760288?page=1458915&sp=1002
:: A vanity site: http://www.praise-and-worship.com/contemporary-christian-music.html
:: The only really good reference, but still not a ] http://voices.yahoo.com/using-contemporary-christian-music-during-worship-363265.html?cat=34
:: Another non RS: http://www.christianmusicarchive.com/artist/happy-goodmans
:: An empty page: http://www.todayschristianmusic.com/artists/the-oak-ridge-boys/videos/
:: I am not going through each one of the terrible references. Please learn what makes a good reference and what constitutes a ]. Your links don't apply to either. --] (]) 07:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
:: No one is saying that what you're writing is or isn't true because that's not the point. Nor is it about what I do and don't like: I love Jon Gibson's music. It's about reliable sources. If you want to discuss it and learn, we'll be happy to do that. If you want to edit war, you may also do that, but you won't last very long. And for the record, any further edits here would likely violate the ]. --] (]) 07:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


:Oh, I see it now; at the end of the ''History'' section. But it doesn't say that the genre itself is propaganda. It says that it's often been used by the Christian right as propaganda against LGBT interests. The word "propaganda here seems to come from the first named source, an article in ''Vice''. Looking over that article it seems to be more of an argument than a straight news source and ''Vice'' is not a strong source anyway according to ]. Still, there's no real doubt that Christian pop music has had anti-gay messages. I would say that we shouldn't just copy the writer's use of the word "propaganda" which is almost always used as a negative but instead just say that Contemporary Christian music has often included anti-LGBT messages. ] (]) 02:59, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Terrible references? You have a bad attitude and it's not something you should be doing on Wiki. First of all, you don't need sources for facts that are already mentioned on the related article. You read the artist's article and it shows they have written/sang christian music. I was just elaborating on this article since it did not give a broad enough example. They have albums and songs already provided on the article. It doesn't require sources. The articles they relate to are sourced. It's not new info! It's not original work. You should stop belittling me and attacking my abilities. You sound very immature and it violated policy. Those sources were to verify they actually produced christian music. They aren't even needed. The entire article isn't even sourced (barely). You only want the people listed YOU want. That's the truth. You also remove the cites that aren't good. You don't revert the entire section. You are power-tripping and it is inappropriate. You never know who is editing and you need to give the benefit of the doubt. Remove what doesn't comply, prove it doesn't comply and keep what is good. That is the way you do things. Other editors/admin will need to assist during this dispute. You are not the final word. If you're not going through them all then you are not required to remove it all. P.S. I also believe you must have more than one account. ] (]) 07:40, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


As perennial sources recommends, I think you're correct that we shouldn't be using the hyperbole from the VICE article verbatim. I passed the original statement through ChatGPT, and it said that it was biased. But it recommended that it be changed to this: "Contemporary Christian music audiences tend to be conservative but there are many on the Christian left within the genre, as such, diverse viewpoints have prominence in the genre Christian LGBTQ artists." So that's what I think we should go with, it removes the inflammatory language and it better reflects the given sources Vice, The Grammy's, LAist, and Pride Source. ] (]) 15:11, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
: Yes, terrible references. It's not personal. I'm sorry you think I'm trying to make it personal and I won't respond that way to you.
: The people (some are bands) listed are those who are described based on a criteria discussed above. If you really want to discuss the references, pick one statement and the references you provided to support it and I'll show how they're not good references. I have already listed six and shown how they don't meet Wikiepdia's requirements, but if you'd like to question me, which you're free to do, ask at ].
: If you think I have more than one account, you may take it up at ].
: I am not the final word, as can be seen above. Feel free to ask specific questions, stop the ] and work at improving the content here rather than add poorly referenced material. --] (]) 07:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 23:06, 17 September 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Contemporary Christian music article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months 
This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMusic/Music genres task force
WikiProject iconContemporary Christian music is within the scope of the Music genres task force of the Music project, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardize music genre articles on Misplaced Pages. Please visit the task force guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good article status.Music/Music genres task forceWikipedia:WikiProject Music/Music genres task forceTemplate:WikiProject Music/Music genres task forcemusic genre
WikiProject iconChristian music Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian music on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Christian musicWikipedia:WikiProject Christian musicTemplate:WikiProject Christian musicChristian music
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconChristianity Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPop music Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media mentionThis article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Archives
Index
Archive 1Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.


The Catholic guitar mass

There is a tension within Misplaced Pages as to whether the music of the Catholic guitar mass should be included in this topic. This current article mentions nothing of guitar masses, Ray Repp, the St. Louis Jesuits, or any modern music for the Catholic mass (Carey Landry, etc). And yet, the Misplaced Pages article on Ray Repp says that his 1965 album "Mass for Young Americans" represented some of the earliest stirrings of Christian contemporary music. This problem is somewhat analogous to how the Misplaced Pages article on "Christian Colleges" tends not to consider Catholic colleges as Christian colleges. It is somewhat insulting to Catholics that they are implied not to be Christians. Thus it is really hard to decide whether modern Catholic music pioneers like Repp and the SL Jesuits should be included in this article. --Westwind273 (talk) 21:59, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

How is there tension over the subject? I don't recall anyone trying to add it. Also, you did not point to a discussion happening about it elsewhere. It seems that it would be more appropriate to include it in the liturgical music article, or possibly in the article on contemporary worship music. I'm not sure why contemporary Catholic liturgical music is not a good location to discuss it though. The contemporary Christian music genre is not an umbrella genre for other genres though. It's essentially the Christian version of pop music.
I'm sorry that protestants are treating Roman Catholics poorly on the Christian colleges article. Granted, Roman Catholics have caused a few problems elsewhere by claiming the term "Catholic" for only themselves. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:57, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I came here to discuss in good faith, not bicker. If you want to discuss with mutual respect, I'm fine with that, but I'm not going to bicker. --Westwind273 (talk) 04:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I did not realize there was bickering. I was pointing out that you did not point to where this tension was created and existed. I then tried to explain where a better location for this topic was in hopes that you would explain why you felt that a guitar mass should be discussed here. I also tried to explain why some editors might take umbrage with with Roman Catholics, but I apparently created some of my own. If you actually want to discuss, feel free to. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

New section - Rejection of the label

A number of bands have made high-profile rejections of the CCM label. I think that's significant for this article, in part because these usually include discussions of the meaning and significance of being labelled as "Contemporary Christian music". I'm thinking of, eg. Needtobreathe#Categorization and Mutemath#Religion. Daask (talk) 14:32, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

What did you have in mind? Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:49, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Went ahead and added this. Due to the no original research policy, I'm not sure how much discussion we can put in, but the artists' own words are citable. Keshiik (talk) 03:35, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

"Stylistically-rooted in Christian Music?"

Thoughts: One, I have no idea what that definitively means, and neither do you, especially "stylistically." Two, considering this topic is "contemporary Christian music" and given that term's typical usage, is there any reason the "stylistically-rooted" note shouldn't read "in pop/rock music?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:2240:7DAD:B08C:56C1:63F2:C334 (talk) 12:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXIT. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Style and Artists

The list of artists is severly out of date, including Third Day (which has now disbanded), Aaron Shust who hasn't released any popular music in a while, and under the historically part, Newsboys, who recently released an album, and has never disbanded. I think one band that should definatly be included is For King and Country, who is the one of the most popular artists in the genre. They have won grammys for their work, and just overall should be apart of this list. Cherrell410 (talk) 21:28, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

“Propaganda”

This is a pretty exceptionally poor wording. Referring to a genre as “propaganda” seems about as silly as saying that black metal is Satanist propaganda, or that punk music is liberal propaganda. I’m actually baffled this has been included - it’s beyond unencyclopedic. Toa Nidhiki05 18:38, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't see where the genre is called propaganda; at least not in the lead which summarizes the article. Goodtablemanners (talk) 01:16, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, the phrase is inflammatory, the VICE article that is cited contains the statement "contemporary Christian music (CCM) has often functioned as a propaganda wing of the Christian right." But that isn't what the article is about, the thesis statement for the article is "Queer musicians say the industry is facing a spiritual crisis: Adapt to a new generation of listeners, or die." While the article is using inflammatory language, such as "propaganda", "spiritual crisis", and "adapt or die", it isn't doing so to prove those points. It is using the language to explain contrasting ideas in the Christian music industry. The current criticism section lists several opponents to CCM within conservative circles, so I don't see how they could see it as a propaganda arm. 2601:8C0:C7C:3DF0:1A9:3E7C:C72E:3635 (talk) 02:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see it now; at the end of the History section. But it doesn't say that the genre itself is propaganda. It says that it's often been used by the Christian right as propaganda against LGBT interests. The word "propaganda here seems to come from the first named source, an article in Vice. Looking over that article it seems to be more of an argument than a straight news source and Vice is not a strong source anyway according to WP:Perennial Sources. Still, there's no real doubt that Christian pop music has had anti-gay messages. I would say that we shouldn't just copy the writer's use of the word "propaganda" which is almost always used as a negative but instead just say that Contemporary Christian music has often included anti-LGBT messages. Goodtablemanners (talk) 02:59, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

As perennial sources recommends, I think you're correct that we shouldn't be using the hyperbole from the VICE article verbatim. I passed the original statement through ChatGPT, and it said that it was biased. But it recommended that it be changed to this: "Contemporary Christian music audiences tend to be conservative but there are many on the Christian left within the genre, as such, diverse viewpoints have prominence in the genre Christian LGBTQ artists." So that's what I think we should go with, it removes the inflammatory language and it better reflects the given sources Vice, The Grammy's, LAist, and Pride Source. 2601:8C0:C7C:3DF0:1199:4BB0:FD7F:23E4 (talk) 15:11, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Categories: