Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:51, 18 September 2008

	Hed PE has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 10, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Musicians This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Mid-importance). An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Punk music (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punk music, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Punk musicWikipedia:WikiProject Punk musicTemplate:WikiProject Punk musicPunk music Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Rock music Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article status

The Hed PE is funked up, its not even funny. they repeat so much crap, and really, just read the History Section, ill be working to fix this up from time to time if noone minds. 68.103.28.224 (talk) 05:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Band name

What is the actual name of this band? The article uses different forms in different places - sometimes "(Həd) p.e.", sometimes "(həd) P.E.", sometimes "Hed PE", and others. --Phronima 14:13, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

On their first album, Church of Realities, it's written as "hәd" on the cover and "(hәd)" on the spine. On the self-titled album it's written "(hәd) pe" on the cover and "(hed) pe" on the spine (I think there's a space in there but I guess that's kind of nitpicky!). On Broke it's written "(hәd) PLANET EARTH" on the cover and on the spine. I don't own Blackout or Only in Amerika, but it looks like Blackout uses the same logo as Broke did, and Only in Amerika uses "HED p.e." On a semi-recent version of their official site it was listed as "HED pe". My personal preferences are either "(hәd) pe" or "HED pe" (space between the hәd and the pe, either all uppercase or all lowercase for the hәd, no periods after the p or the e since they just tacked those on there to differentiate themselves from another band called Head ). Blogbourri 17:28, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

I think now it is (hed). But I will have them as (hed)pe on my iPod forever ;-)

Just FYI for anyone who cares (which is probably nobody), I added the "technical restriction" tag to the top of the article to show that the correct capitalization does not include a capitalized h. While the band has gone by many names, I think everyone can agree that none of them have included the capitalization of the h unless the e and d are also capitalized, which they are not in the page's title. -- Kicking222 18:28, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

If the schwa is a problem, why not move it to (hed) pe - the brackets are definitely part of the band name, and Misplaced Pages can handle it, unlike --Montchav (talk) 22:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:MOS-TM also asks us to "avoid using special characters that are not pronounced are included purely for decoration". Dekimasuよ! 04:53, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus 12:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

(həd) p.e. → Hed PE — Per WP:MOS-TM, we should avoid special characters like the schwa in titles, particularly when they are only used for decoration (the schwa here doesn't make a schwa sound). Separately, WP:MOS-TM says that trademarks starting with lowercase letters should always be capitalized, and that terms that aren't acronyms should only have their first letters capitalized. The band's record company refers to it as "HED PE", "Hed P.E.", "(hed) p.e." and "Hed PE". I have no strong feelings about including the periods, but it seems clear that the current title is not preferred by the MOS. This change would also affect several other articles: (həd) p.e. (album), Blackout ((həd) p.e. album), Insomnia ((həd) p.e. album), The Best of (həd) Planet Earth, and (həd) p.e. discography. —Dekimasuよ! 07:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Misplaced Pages's naming conventions.

• Support a move to Hed PE or any of User:Dekimasu's suggested locations per WP:MOS-TM and external link usage which includes and "Hed PE" and "(hed)p.e" (without the schwa) among others. — AjaxSmack 01:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support. My cogent argument thus: "Hey dude, I got a cool name for our band. We'll call it Hed PE but we'll use these little squiggly characters instead of regular letters." Ugh. --DeLarge (talk) 11:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hed PE/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   In the Formation and major-label debut (1994–99) section, this sentence ---> "The band built a following based on energetic performances at local venues such as Club 369", might need to be re-written, as it sounds a little strange.

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   In the Broke and Blackout (2000–04) section, link "Modern Rock Tracks". Same section, add a colon after "wrote" on reviews of the band/albums. In the Independent releases (2005–present) section, this sentence ---> "Allmusic's Rob Theakston wrote that "Back 2 Base X suffers from the same problems as Amerika: it tries to be conceptual in thought à la Tool and vicious in its political commentary à la Fugazi or System of a Down", does this sentence, about "Tool", talk about the device or the band?

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   Does Reference 2 cover all this ---> "Hed PE released their second studio album, Broke on August 22, 2000. It incorporated more classic rock and world music influences, and featured guest appearances by System of a Down's Serj Tankian and Kittie's Morgan Lander"?

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   It would help if an image can be inserted to the article, so it can illustrate the significance of it. But, if an image can't be found, I won't fail the article because of that.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

• 1A: Done. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 01:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC))
• 1B: Fixed. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 01:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

2. YES. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 01:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC))
6. There are no free images on Flickr. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 01:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

Thank you to Ibaranoff24 for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Genre discussion

The majority of sources found in relation to the band and their albums point to alternative metal, punk rock and rap rock as the main genres for this article's infobox, and punk rock/rap rock for each of the individual albums. Nu metal is not listed on the band or album articles because there are not enough sources to include this supposed genre (did it ever exist before it supposedly declined?) in their oeuvre. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 10:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC))

Well, I've changed the genres to "alternative rock" and "nu metal", as those are given by rockdetector, a reliable source. If more sources are found, this can be changed around. Prophaniti (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The majority of the sources that I have found and use in the article cite Hed PE as a punk rock band, and the band itself identifies as such. I don't think that rockdetector is notable enough to add inaccurate genre terms to a punk band's repertoire. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 16:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC))

Rockdetector (or musicmight, as it's now known) does count as a reliable source. It's the site of published and respected rock/metal journalist Garry Sharpe-Young. Listening to their music, I can definitely hear nu metal in it much stronger than the punk side: there're hefty ammounts of hip hop and rap in there. There's definitely a hardcore aspect, but then "nu metal" is generally a blending of modern hard rock, hardcore and hip hop/rap, with little to no metal side, so that fits. So, I'll keep it as the cited genres unless other sources can be found that conflict with that. Prophaniti (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The article for Rockdetector does not establish notability beyond the fact that it exists and that its creator happened to have written a couple of books on metal. Additionally, that website has countless mistakes (if you search for the hip hop group Insane Clown Posse, the genre listed is "industrial") in its band biographies. There's no proof that this author wrote the site's Hed PE biography, and there's no reason to recklessly attribute genres that a band does not perform in, beyond the fact that "nu metal" isn't actually an existing genre of music being that it has been applied to countless bands across various genres with no legitimacy to the term being an actual existing style of music - isn't it illogical that a genre term with the word "metal" in it isn't actually a subgenre of heavy metal? Beyond that, whatever elements you feel that are connected to this supposed genre are actually connected to the rapcore style. I have done a great deal of research in cleaning up this article. Hed PE are a punk/rapcore group. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 01:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC))

Nevertheless, it is a website attributed to and run by him. To assume the articles aren't his is original research. As it happens, I don't think "nu metal" is an appropriate term either, because it's got zero metal influence in it. However, if it has to exist, it should at least be consistent, and this band -do- fit the qualities given of the genre, and have a reliable source to back it up.

Rap rock is the appropriate term for the qualities you hear that you attribute to nu metal. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 22:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC))

Concerning the site itself, I'll stop using it when the rest of wikipedia stops using allmusic for metal bands/genres: the site makes far fewer mistakes than allmusic on metal bands/genres; Sharpe-Young may have "only written a few books on metal", but by that same logic it still outranks allmusic in reliability; and the section on this band might not have been written by him, but equally, there's nothing whatsoever suggesting anything written on allmusic is done by anyone with knowledge of what they're talking about. So sorry, as long as allmusic counts as any kind of valid source, so too does musicmight. Prophaniti (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't use Allmusic in sourcing the band's genres. I went by the quantity and quality of the sources used, thus alternative rock, punk rock and rap rock are mentioned in this article. You still can't use citations in Infoboxes. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 22:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC))

My reference to allmusic is more due to it's common nature on wikipedia rather than you specifically using it.

You saying the genre is actually rap rock when there is a valid source -very clearly- giving it as nu metal constitutes original research. Likewise, unless you have direct quotes giving their genres as alt. rock, punk rock and rap rock, that too is original research. If you do have those, add them in clearly and properly, and even if then, the nu metal tag is staying. Prophaniti (talk) 23:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

First of all, you are not supposed to have citations in the Infobox. Secondly, the genres listed are very clearly sourced. You simply refuse to pay attention to them. Thirdly, the links clearly work. You choose to ignore this fact in order to further your own agenda. Hed PE are not nu metal. Saying so based on what some fan site says is original research. Back off. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 20:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC))

(reset indents) Firstly, I suggest you calm down. Your tone is very clearly angry, and I won't stand for attempts at intimidation when I'm the one abiding by the rules here.

If you don't like the citations in the infobox, you can very easily shift them.

Now, regarding the main issue: do not make assumptions about what I am doing. No, I am not "simply refusing to pay attention". No, I am not "choosing to ignore facts" because of "my own agenda". My agenda is abiding by wikipedia's rules and improving it thus. -Any- further threats/intimidation attempts/personal attacks like that will be reported and otherwise ignored.

Let's take a quick look at the "styles and influences" section, shall we? The "G-punk" references don't mean anything much, since that isn't, to my knowledge, an acknowledged genre. The "fusion of styles" reference is the one that doesn't work: whenever I click it I just get the Naperville Sun "sorry, we can't find what you're looking for" page. Then there's a reference about a band's influence, which can't indicate their genre either (influences by no means equate actual genre. Metallica were influenced by punk bands, doesn't mean they're punk). The Rolling Stone reference can be used of course, but the only genre references it makes are "kind of rap rock" and "rap metal". The rest of that section is quoted from the band itself, and a band's own opinion means nothing.

So, overall, no. There's nothing in there to back up the "punk rock" genre at all, and even the rap rock one is a stretch, but acceptable.

In fact, it is YOU who aren't paying attention to the sources. Musicmight is not "some fan site". It is, as I have already explained to you, the site of Garry Sharpe-Young, a reliable source. Both he, and his site, have been published. This makes them reliable sources, and much more than "some fan site".

So:

1.) Get your facts straight.

2.) Don't make offensive claims/assumptions

3.) Stop removing sourced content

4.) Find some sources if you want those other genres kept in. Prophaniti (talk) 21:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Music good articles
• All unassessed articles
• GA-Class biography articles
• GA-Class biography (musicians) articles
• Mid-importance biography (musicians) articles
• Musicians work group articles
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs of musicians
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs of people
• WikiProject Biography articles
• GA-Class Rock music articles
• Mid-importance Rock music articles
• WikiProject Rock music articles