Talk:Tech trance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Music/Music genres task force

Tech trance 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 Wikipedia. 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 articles

I removed this page from the genre list because it's not really called techtrance. I would argue that although it exists, it's not really a genre. Plus, as you admitted, it's a sub-genre and should go under trance.

Sorry, but who cutted out all the info I've been added to this page? Johan Gielen is anthem trance & uplifting trance, not tech-trance. Tech-trance is the style Marco V playing. Also every subgenre has seperated page, why this one wouldn't have? --81.182.120.12 12:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tracks?[edit]

I think the list of example tracks is really unecessary. I don't believe that any other genre article has something like that. Instead, very flushed out genre articles will reference tracks sporadicaly to show significant moments in the genre. At this point, I think the article is too small for something like that. Bognan72 (talk) 22:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guys - sorry but I don't see the harm in having it there. So I've added the 'tracks' section back into this article in order to make it easier for people interested in the genre to discover similar artists. I realise this, in effect, makes the article dissimilar from 'trance' and other genre article but I think it's OK to be slightly different and not necessairily conform to the standard article format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarxis (talk • contribs) 14:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We aren't a music guide. Those lists don't belong. - Shiftchange (talk) 14:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tracks vs Artists?[edit]

Wouldn't it be a better idea to create a list of artists in the genre, instead of a track/ compilation list? That way interested parties can always do a websearch for videos or click on links to the artist's wikipage. Your thoughts on this please? Vachnic (talk) 14:50, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]