You are definitely right, that the band is strange in many aspects. The music, for example, is certainly not pure black metal , but a mixture of hard rock, rac and some black metal elements. IMo this at least warrants a re-evaluation. When I heard thr first solo, I almost thought this is a Bon Jovi or Whitesnake song from the eighties: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANMQaSD-FtI
Anyway,here is the full album Galgenhumor" so you as a native German speaker or Paganiusi can check their accent : http://88nsm.com/2085-14winterkampf88-g ... -2007.html
https://www.discogs.com/artist/5682685-14Winterkampf88

Am I correct in assuming, as with regions, we should always use the official name of a city rather than any alternatives, however widespread they may be (unless there is an English translation)?

Use the English name whenever possible, when there are multiple options on Wikipedia or elsewhere (like alternations and such), go with the english Google Maps. At least one of the two should have a name listed.

Thank you!

Has there not be a policy against one-copy releases?
https://www.metal-archives.com/albums/A ... .66/144449

I'm looking for clarification, cause I feel like I missed some policy change. I've always been under the impression that promotional releases were not allowed on the site. I distinctly remember having several child entry additions deleted when we moved over to V2 because "we don't list promotional releases". However, when reporting a handful of promo-only releases from the Ozzy Osbourne solo catalog yesterday, a number of them were closed without removal, with responses along the lines of "people are selling this on Discogs, so it's acceptable". So, where is the line drawn on this? If someone is reselling a promo-only release online, does that count enough to add it here, on the basis that it must have seen some kind of public release?

Is there any policy on "All Instruments, Vocals" versus "Everything" in the artist role field? I've seen "Guitars, Bass, Drums, Vocals" and any kind of variation on that often reduced to "All Instruments, Vocals" but recently, I've also noticed a moderator changing a lot of the latter into simply "Everything". On the other hand, I've seen a few moderators who add new bands with "All Instruments, Vocals" rather than "Everything" in the artist role field. This gave me the impression there's not much of a policy on it and that the mod whose name I forgot was merely changing it because of personal preferences. Am I right in thinking that, or should I help out changing "All Instruments, Vocals" and similar shit into "Everything" whenever I come across it?

I don't believe we have a policy on this and that you are correct in thinking it's more of a personal preference sort of thing.

Thank you, I'll just leave it then.

Personally, I prefer to use ''All instruments'' when it doesn't include vocals, and ''Everything'' when it does. However, it's ultimately a matter of preference and I would never change them from one to the other. There are multiple ways of presenting the information, and it's not worth getting obsessed over which is best. As evident from the discussion below, there's not really a right or wrong in this case.

Thanks for sharing that. I'm with Alhadis/Azmodes on this (although I can appreciate Morrigan's pragmatic addition). It's always nice to be able to see whether there's bass or keys or not, real or programmed drums, &c. And especially in the case of unusual folk or classical instruments, 12-string basses &c. I feel it would be an unwelcome loss of information to simply reduce it to "Everything".

I found a blog that attests an EP by a band listed here (and provides a download link). The band's page only lists their recent LP. Should I just add it or clear it with staff or something...? The EP isn't listed for official sale on their bandcamp.

Only add it if you can confirm that it is an official EP released by the band. Download blogs are usually not official, but they might be based on official releases or in rare cases are band sanctioned. If you can't confirm that it was released by the band, don't add it.

I have this doubt regarding capitalisation of the lyrical themes. How should it be done?

1. Internal Struggles, Heavy Metal Way of Life; or
2. Internal struggles, Heavy metal way of life.

I always go for 2 based, for instance, on this, but a confirmation is kindly requested

You're not mistaken, #2 is the correct way.

Thank you, KJ.

Can't find anywhere else to put this but I think it's an emerging issue. Some bands (Metallica being a key example) have started to go down the Pearl Jam route of making all their concerts available for purchase as a download or a CD from their online store. Some of these are being added to the Archives, but not consistently.

Therefore:

1) Adding all of these types of releases might make the discography pages extremely unwieldy.

2) Perhaps should be notified on the info pages of these 'official bootleg' style releases that they are part of such a release programme?

These releases are all official AFAIK so they can't really be ignored.

It's not wrong doing, but do we need such a change (Japan to Japan edition)?

https://www.metal-archives.com/albums/T ... low/703299

No, because our standard is to just go with the country tag.

I know we don't normally do "Not to be confused with" additions on band pages unless the bands share a name and a country, but one thing I've seen more recently is additions of "Unknown Artist", where the person/band is über kvlt and doesn't give themselves an actual name, of which we have documented 4 so far. Since these are inherently harder to catalog, and purposefully vague in their information, would it be beneficial to do a "Not to be confused with" blurb on these pages to help users differentiate between them? I ask only because 3 of the 4 have a verified country of origin, all of which are different.

(666th post) What exactly would you write? Personally, I can't see how that will clear anything up, if not make it more confusing. They're all from different countries, have different albums, different subgenres of black metal, I think that's enough info to be able to comfortably differentiate between each band.

Well, my first thought was something similar to the following, with a different combination depending on which page you were currently on:

Not to be confused with:

The unnamed Black/Grind band from France
The unnamed Black Metal band from Germany
The unnamed Atmospheric Black Metal band from Portugal
The unnamed Raw Black Metal band from an unknown country of origin

Sure, they play different strains of black metal, and 75% have at least a basic country of origin, but they don't seem to stand out much from each other in any other way. 75% only have 'untitled' releases, and I believe only one has any kind of year range. Most of this is probably by design, since they are intentionally obscure, but that's beside the point.

How can we be sure that "Unknown Artists" isn't their actual band name? Also "unnamed" indicates that the band does not have a name...but we don't know that. They might have a name but don't want to present it on the release for some reason.

I feel like that's splitting hairs to a degree. As has been stated here many times before, artist intentions (or in this case, secret band names) are meaningless in documenting our information. Maybe they have a name for themselves in their own mind, but for our purposes, they're "unnamed" on their release, which is what we have available to go on. We also know that they're not named "Unknown Artist" because we have easy online access to their releases and liner notes, most of which include long-winded pretentious artist statements about how Black Metal is trve and kvlt and listeners should focus on the music, blah blah blah. None of those indicate they are actually trying to broadcast or market themselves as "Unknown Artist", just that they're unnamed for artistic sentiment.

What I'm struggling to understand, MCH, is why such a note is necessary just because they're named "Unknown Artist" on the site. Let's imagine that there were 4 bands from various countries called "Bright Pink Elephant" with untitled releases... why would we not use such a note? Why, if 4 bands had that name (which is admittedly not a great example), would they stand out from each other any more than 4 unknown artists? The aforementioned aspects (genre, country) are enough to distinguish between the bands, in my opinion.

Is there a contributor with a Patreon account who likes Russian female-fronted prog metal, or simply has too much money?

a most noble task requires some magnanimous assistance:

https://www.metal-archives.com/report/view/id/686652

Hi! Is there any way to change the alias some artist use? Im friends with N from the band Selbst
He asked me to change some images for the live line up, which I did, but he also asked me If i could change the aliases they use. The Drummer it's ok, as he appears as "JPC" when performing live for Selbst, but the Bass player and the Guitar player prefer to be called "HL" and "MO" respectively when performing live with Selbst. I made a report on which I shared a link from their official facebook page stating their stage names.

https://www.facebook.com/selbstbm/photo ... =3&theater

Sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this, thank you.

it's probably been announced/discussed somewhere, but I can't seem to find it... what are the current size limits for images, please?

Band/artist photos: 200KB
Band logo/album arts: 100KB
Label logos: still 40KB

wow, big changes! thanks

Yes it can be done, but your rank is not sufficient to make such updates.

Yeah I figured I wouldn't be able, that's why I made a report asking for someone to make it and it said that the facebook link was a "bad link" and closed the case

Link works fine for me, I'll take care of the updates later. It's probably a privacy issue - Stormy doesn't use Facebook and you probably need to log in to see it. You can always screenshot proof, screenshots uploaded to imgur are guaranteed to work.

A bestfriend of mine told me, why reason Metallum don't add every genre to every album, like Wikipedia? In order to avoid confusion and the fan knows that he listens better, I replied that there is no need to do so at least for me, that I am a metalhead of many years who identified any genre of metal immediately, just by listening to it. Now I am curious to know, if at any time they thought or if they are thinking about that actually ?

We do not plan to list genres for every album, and I highly doubt we ever will. I personally would be strongly against it. Band genres are enough of a headache which I don't even want to imagine extending to albums. For the minute details not listed in the genre, we have similar artists and reviews. If a band does undergo a major change of style, as you know we use "(early)" and "(later)" tags, which work very well.

Exactly, in other words that was what I meant to say to him, when I told him that there is no need, in addition to a headache, I must emphasize that it's also a pain in the ass. Me too it would also definitely be against that idea, if it comes to execution.

Ohh I see! Well thank you! I'll make the report again then.