Talk:Heavydirtysoul

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Alternative music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Tempo#Beats per minute|beats per minute]] The anchor (#Beats per minute) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Notability tag[edit]

I added the notability for music because there is very little in the way of prose in the article. Just because a song charts somewhere doesn't mean it needs an article. If people are writing about it, so should the project. Improve the article with addition content other than basic facts. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:40, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 February 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) B dash (talk) 09:47, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Heavydirtysoul (song) → Heavydirtysoul – I'm pretty sure this is the primary topic, and "Heavydirtysoul" already redirects here. Also, I think there shouldn't be a DAB page for this per WP:TWODABS. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support move as obvious primary topic. ONR (talk) 17:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was going to propose this move; I just converted the DAB to a redirect. Qzekrom (talk) 21:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. A dab page seems unnecessary and I also feel that the song should be regarded as primary. PC78 (talk) 00:01, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per primary topic. Xain36 {talk} 12:34, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Persistent prose problems[edit]

The article has been saddled with far too many florid turns of phrase, which are unencyclopedic when delivered in Wikipedia's voice. Examples include:

"With the schizophrenic nature of its music" – music cannot be schizophrenic. If you want to use this word, quote the source.
"The opening track leaps between various music genre boundaries" – Failed verification as well as too-close paraphrasing. The cited Sputnik source says the album, not the song, "jumps between hip-hop, rock, pop, and even reggae as if genre boundaries don’t exist." If you say in Wikipedia's voice that the track "leaps" between genre boundaries, changing the original "jumps" to "leaps" then you have violated copyright, according to Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing.
"Joseph sings a desperate plea for someone to save his heavy, dirty soul." The Spectrum Culture source says, "Joseph sings a desperate plea for someone to save his heavy, dirty soul"... Total copyright violation.
"anthemic bridge incorporates a tag line" – This is copied from two sources. The Altpress source says "anthemic tagline", and the Stuff source says "anthemic bridge".
"Joseph alternates from quick-tempered rapping to falsetto screaming, and even alludes to the concept" – The Sputnik source says "Tyler Joseph alternates between rapping, singing, and screaming like they’re all the same, and he even alludes to the idea..." Too-close paraphrasing.
"Blurryface had served to go beyond the scope of music to become a release for Joseph with its titular character, and a key factor in musically grasping the album was comprehending the psyche of the "Blurryface" alter ego." – Nobody will ever understand what this stuff means. This is hyperbolic nonsense; inedible word salad.
"an aggressively fast-talking opening track which nonetheless boasts an unexpectedly melodic chorus." – The Upcoming source says "the aggressively fast-talking opening track Heavydirtysoul, which nevertheless boasts a surprisingly melodic chorus."

There are more of these copyright problems, and comprehension problems, and failed verification problems, so I'm rolling the article back to its condition before the recent additions. Binksternet (talk) 02:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the recent edit have added too much WP:PEACOCK terms and should be toned down. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary additions[edit]

This is entirely unnecessary. LupEnd007 (talk · contribs) is edit warring to make this article larger than it needs to be. Unnecessary detail to the lede. Why, because it's not more than the MoS. Is pop music an [[:WP:OVERLINK in this environment? YES! Is rock music? Yes. This is a barely notable album tthaty is not 400 percent larger than it needs to be because of WP:FANCRUFT and now even the lede is unnecessarily long. The WP:ONUS is on the editor who is adding it back to prove it's necessary, not the editor who clearly states why it should be removed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:32, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Binksternet: Just a courtesy since you warned LupEnd007 about the COPIVIO added here earlier. Not sure if you have an opinion about the rest. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was planning to comb through the recent big expansion to check for copyvio but also to pare down instances of florid prose, and to trim redundancies and trivialities such as routine performances of the song. Binksternet (talk) 03:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]