I've been noticing that individuals have been going around updating band pics to collages that include current and former members. Why is this being allowed? Don't the rules state that band pics must, ideally, be of current or last-known lineups only? Frankly, I think they're annoying, since it doesn't seem relevant to feature former members. There was an announcement a while back on the main page about logo collages not being allowed for the time being until a better method for implementing them is discovered. So, can we maintain a similar policy regarding band pics? I think it would be for the best.

Additionally, it's pointless to upload these collages when band pics get updated every now and then, because of old members leaving, new members joining, or existing members changing in appearance as they age.

I think the same should also apply to individual artist pages.

It should definitely be avoided in general and, at most, only be kept to a very select few classic and notable bands with long-running careers.

Is there anything that's going to be done about stopping and/or reversing these updates, though? There's one user in particular, Quorthallis, who has been doing this with great frequency. I've come across at least 10 band pages with their pics changed to collages that were done by him.

Check his modification history:
https://www.metal-archives.com/users/Quorthallis

I think action should be taken by the owners or mods in addressing this issue via a message on the main page before this happens a lot more. I'm willing to go and reverse these updates by changing the band pics back to reflect current lineups, but it'll be pointless if these particular users will continue doing what they're doing unchecked.

I will send the user a message. A news post might also not be a bad idea; I have a few items I have to get off my chest anyway and could add this issue to the list.

You have my okay to revert any such chances, provided we aren't talking about Judas Priest-tier bands and such (ask in here or make a report if you're unsure). Thanks.

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=94071&start=1320 and yet when I posted it here nobody gave two shits about it. At first, I've asked if it was ok and it was ignored just like that. Then I've edited my post to be about providing the rules about the collages for which bands the collages would be ok and for which not and it was ignored once again. So yeah, something should be definitely done about it.

Apologies for that, I've been primarily trying to keep the band queue from getting utterly out of control these past few weeks and don't check that particular subforum as often as I should. Anyway, I briefly talked to HellBlazer about this and the current stance is as my second-to-last post said: generally to be avoided unless we're talking about a super significant band that also has a lengthy career under their belt. I'd probably keep it to the latest pic only in Nightwish's case.

I've pretty much taken time to look at the bands with collages added either by me or the other users, so I would make a few suggestions that would make all of our lives easier.
For bands like Judas Priest, Thin Lizzy, Motörhead, Saxon, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Venom it is pretty much a no-brainer that they should have a collage. But then we get to a trickier part which is the thrash metal scene. That was already swarming with collages before I even added a single one, so as a solution to that I think only Metallica and Slayer should have collages. Megadeth, Anthrax, Celtic Frost, and the Teutonic 4 are debatable, as for the rest I think only the latest pic should do.
The worst parts are the black and death metal scenes. When we have bands like Cannibal Corpse, Morbid Angel, Darkthrone, Emperor, Immortal, and others it is very difficult to determine which one is more significant than the other since all of them are huge bands in their own right. I mean who is to say that Cannibal Corpse is more classical than Darkthrone? So as a solution to that problem I suggest that only Mayhem and Possessed should have collages due to their historical significance for both of those scenes and since they are pretty much the bands that started the whole thing. The others should have the latest pic only.
As for other bands like Exciter, Whiplash, Razor, Fates Warning, Twisted Sister, Bulldozer, Queensrÿche, Skid Row, Blind Guardian, etc. maybe only the latest pic should be fine.
Of course, these are just suggestions, and the mods obviously don't have to stick to them. But I just think that these suggestions would make the lives of everyone contributing to this page way easier.

It would be easier to just not allow collages altogether than to engage in tedious debates over which bands are "influential enough" (which sounds nebulous) to have collages as their band pics.

This kinda reminds me of how there used to be a "legacy lineup" tab in bands' lineup sections, but was ultimately removed, because it was deemed pointless. I think the same applies here.

Again, what is the point of collages, anyway? Why do people need to know what lineups from decades ago looked like? They can look them up on Google if they're curious. Second, how do you choose which old lineup to add to the collages? In the case of Megadeth, for example, they had two legendary lineups: the one that comprised their first two albums and the one that comprised Rust in Peace. In other words, bands can have multiple legacy lineups that could be considered pertinent enough to include in collages.

Let's stick to the rules and do away with them altogether in order to avoid the needless favouritism you are proposing, Quorthallis.

I must say you've proven your point quite well. I didn't even know that there was a legacy lineup tab in the past. If the legacy lineup tab was ditched, then there is definitely no need for collage photos. As you've said, this can only lead to unnecessary debates over what band is more significant than the other and we really don't need that here. If there are some bands that should have collage, like the already mentioned Judas Priest, then it would be for the best that they are listed in the rules as exceptions. As for other bands, there is no need for collages. The same should be applied to the artist pages as well.

The "legacy line-up" is not what you guys think it was. When the site went through an upgrade a number of years back, we introduced artist pages at that time. Previously, line-ups were only written on band pages, like so. While users were creating artist pages and transferring over information to those pages, the original formatting for the line-ups were available as "legacy line-ups" for them to reference. They were removed once artist pages were created, since they were just a temporary stop-gap measure when that feature was added.

In that case, I think would be for the best that the most significant bands determined by the mods have a right to have a collage. That way it is fair towards everyone and the users will know clearly what is expected of them.


Since you've switched to accusatory tone, it would be good to remind you that this is not a kids playground. As much as we don't need tedious discussions over what band is more influential, we certainly don't need childish fights among users throwing accusatory statements at each other. If you have an urge to do that, then please do it somewhere else. If not, then please contribute something of value which could be helpful to everyone. Thank you.

I still think doing away with collages altogether would be best, but, yes, they can decide whatever they want.


So you wait until a mod corrects me on a point I made to say what you really wanted to say in contradiction to your previous post in which you were stating what a compelling case I made? I didn't "switch" to any tone. The post I made that you agreed with initially is the same one you are now offended by, apparently. Your post comes off as just another case of "I can't say what I truly wish to say unless others feel the same about it."

My "accusation" is not unfounded. What I said you were proposing is exactly just that: playing favourites with bands that meet some semi-relative, preliminary standard of "influential" instead of going by a more rational adherence to the actual rules of the site regarding band pics. My previous post was made in good faith and was intended to aid in finding a resolution to this issue, so please don't patronize me by telling me what I can and cannot say, unless it's obviously some direct attack on you.

I'm not forbidding you to have your opinion and I still agree with the case you made for the most part. What I meant was just editing your comment to name me isn't helping anyone in any way really, and thus brings us no closer to the solution. Maybe I should have said that instead, but whatever. Now on to the case, since the mod provided an explanation, I think there is no actual way to avoid favourizing one band over the other because that is pretty much the point of having collages, to showcase significance. Unless your suggestion is taken into account, I'm afraid that the favourizing will be happening. Also, there is the side-project rule, the rule that inevitably encourages favourizing of bands over the bands because how can you determine which side project is more appropriate than which if they are both not metal? But that's a bit off-topic, so I'll stop here. We will have to wait and see what solution will the mods come up with. It's their call after all.

For the record, the two edits I made in that post were not done to include that remark about you; they were to correct a couple of grammatical errors I caught after I had initially submitted the post. The part where I mention your favouritism was always there and not added afterwards.

It's funny you mention the side-project rule. That's another one of these exceptions I am not fond of. I would love to see all those darkwave and other non-metal projects gone. Same with the inclusion of Mayhem's infamous bootleg live album in contradiction to the rule about no bootlegs allowed in bands' discographies, because of its "history". I believe that there should be greater consistency in the following of the rules, whether by regular users, mods, or the admins, with no exceptions or favouritism tolerated ever. But, hey, what can you do?

In that case, I apologize. I've probably seen it wrong or I haven't read very carefully. I'll take note on that.


Considering the side-project rule, I've brought up one such band in the band appeal and the mod replied to me that they are not accepting any user-submitted projects at the moment because they are discussing whether they want side-projects on this site anymore. So it would probably be a good idea to bring this up as well.

Don't worry about it. I'm not here to fight, just get this issue resolved. I'm sorry if I came off as confrontational.


Interesting. If "side-project" in the context of the site's rules is to indicate any and all non-metal bands that are in the database, then that's great, since the site will finally be purified of such arbitrary and irrelevant inclusions. However, I also wonder if they're just referring to non-metal bands that are side-projects. If it's the latter, I'm curious as to what will happen to bands like Mortiis, since it's not metal nor a side-project.

It is also not very clear to me since the mod mentioned that side-projects are not being allowed for submission at the moment. But you can ask in the separate thread about this if you want and see what the mods will say.

We no longer accept non-metal exceptions, yeah. That includes non-metal side-projects, as well. The mod who said that we're considering removing them may have jumped the gun there. There have been long debates among staff in the past about whether to keep them or not, but it appears the prevailing policy is just to let them be. There's roughly 100 such projects, and we keep tabs on all of them.

Regarding band collages, I think Az made a valid point that the current practice is that they should be avoided in general, but may be used in select cases. Ideally, perhaps someday we may end up in a situation where we can host multiple band photos of different line-ups in a slideshow on all band pages, though that day is not yet here.

I've pretty much done the work on reversing the collages. The bands that I left with the collages are pretty much all the bands we can agree on that should be allowed to have and those are Judas Priest, Thin Lizzy, Motörhead, Saxon, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Metallica, Slayer, and Venom. Other exceptional cases are the ones people are well aware of and those are Edge of Sanity and Dethklok. As the updated rules say, for all the other bands the latest pic is enough.

Thanks.

News post is now up.

The best solution to avoid collages would imo be to make the site allow multiple band pictures.
I find it interesting to see bands in different stages, i.e. Ketzer changed from Blackthrash to Post-Black not only musically, but also optically.

And if the staff decides to rework the picture system (as is already planned for logos, if I'm not mistaken), they could consider a feature to link the persons' faces in the band pictures to their artist pages.

Yes, multiple images in general are a planned feature.

What about collages on artist pages?

Added one more collage exception and there is more than enough justification for this band to have a collage photo and that band is Scorpions. Lengthy career under their belt, millions of albums sold, huge historical significance, and the rules also treat them as one of the historically significant exceptions on this website. Pretty much they satisfy all of the criteria to have a collage photo. This narrows down collage exception to 10 bands in total and those are Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Thin Lizzy, Scorpions, Judas Priest, Motörhead, Saxon, Venom, Metallica, and Slayer.