Talk:Project 86

Noj_R, I see that you've starting working on the references as per my GA review. I thought that I'd demonstrate what I mean here, for clarity's sake. There are two ways to handle the references in a well-written, well-researched article.

Option #1:
Project 86 was formed in June 1996 by vocalist Andrew Schwab and drummer Alex Albert in Orange County, California.^[1]

As you can see, this webpage has the "all pages" option. I highly suggest that you post that URL; not only is it just easier, you don't have to separate it into "p. 1" and "p. 2". Then when you refer to this source in the future, all you have to do is write the ^[2] code. Also notice that when it's done this way, you don't have to include it in the "References" section because it automatically goes in "Notes". Personally, this is my favorite way to handle references. I think it's easier, for both the editor and the reader. Also, I tend to use the ^[3] when citing a book or a journal.

Option #2:
Project 86 was formed in June 1996 by vocalist Andrew Schwab and drummer Alex Albert in Orange County, California.^[4]

This method retains what you're trying to do, I think. Notice that the entry is highlighted in the "Notes" section, allowing the reader to click on the reference instead of having to scroll up and down. This is exactly the same method used in The Beatles, so it may be a better choice for this musical band article. It's up to you which method you want to use, but make sure it's consistent all the way through. --Christine (talk) 21:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

• I was indeed emulating the style used in the Beatles. I will address the smaller issues shortly. Thank you for your patience. -- Noj r (talk) 01:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I see that. I think that this is a good way to set up the references/notes sections for articles about bands. Now I will go through and make sure the rest of the review has been satisfied before I pass it. --Christine (talk) 12:45, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The band's early albuns, Project 86 and Drawing Black Lines were nu metal, and here is a support to their first album. (ReisPacheco (talk) 05:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC))

Here is one more reliable source for the genre. (ReisPacheco (talk) 05:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC))

I took a look at the references and listen to some of the older material, and I agree that it has a Nu Metal sound. I think to cut down on any changes or objections, it would be wise to put one of the refrences in the infobox. --Spencerz (talk) 00:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

People feel Project 86 is a Christian band because publications (primarily Christian ones) regard them as such. I argue that this affiliation is based on their world view and not their actual music and is therefore arbitrary. Please consider that none of their lyrics are explicitly Christian; they do not sing about Jesus, salvation, the cross, or any other Christian themes for that matter. Sometimes they sing about God, but that could hardly be considered evidence enough. The belief in God itself also does not automatically affiliate one with Christianity as many religions are monotheist. Also, a host of artists from all genres sing about God and are not classified as Christian—humorously, Carrie Underwood's lyrics could be seen as more "Christian" than Project 86 and she is not considered a Christian artist. Consider Orson Scott Card: we do not regard him as a Mormon science fiction author simply because he writes science fiction and has large affiliations with Mormonism. He is simply a science fiction author as Project 86 are simply a rock band.

As for the purely musical genre, Project 86 is generally considered a rock band. Sources confirm this. I will not dispute the fact that they were metal in the past (nu metal), but they are not anymore. I would like to point out that I thoroughly researched this article and articulated as clearly and unbiased as possible to avoid any misunderstanding regarding this touchy issue. -- Noj r (talk) 23:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

If they claimed that they were a disco band but didn't play disco would that make them such? If a WP:RS said they were a disco band, we could argue all we wanted that they weren't, but the source would stand. If we want to show how the source is wrong, we could offer counter sources to make the point, but until that source is proven invalid, it would stand. So four three sources and countless unreliable fans call them Christian metal (or Christian rock if you would rather) it's the editor's job to offer counter-claims, not simply remove the claims because of some personal opinion regardless how valid it is. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

One counter claim is Schwab basically saying "we're just a band, not a Christian band". This claim is hardly as fantastical as one like "we are a disco band" and thus it must be seriously considered. Another reliable source is their lyrics, which give absolutely no evidence of Christendom. This is a contentious issue. I thoroughly researched this article and wrote it to be as neutral as possible. Undoubtedly, saying they are an "American rock band" and then addressing the issues fairly is the most unbiased (and best) solution possible. -- Noj r (talk) 00:53, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

You're twisted the quote. The actual quote is: "We're not going to go in there and say 'Hey we're the Christian band.'" (emphasis mine). It means they don't want to be pigeon-holed as nothing but a Christian band Another reliable source is the lyrics which give a great deal of evidence of their Christian faith. Removing the fact that they're a Christian band from the lede is bias and the worst solution possible. Might as well remove that they're Americans and a band. They're distributed by a Christian label. They have recently tried to distance themselves from the Christian-only marketplace, but that doesn't change their status in the sub-industry. Most importantly, there are WP:RS that back the claim. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

No, Schwab meant that they weren't going to go in there and spill their beliefs to everybody, but instead keep it to themselves. We could argue either way with the quote. The point is he does not want to be labeled a Christian band, just a band. After all "the goal has been to just write music that we love, and write music hopefully that is challenging and inspiring to people", right?. An attempt to distance themselves from the Christian industry is evidence enough of their intentions. I would like you to show me where these explicit Christian lyrics are. I mean explicit. I mean if somebody unfamiliar with them heard their lyrics they could identify them as Christians. Removing this from the lead is not bias. It is a controversial issue. Being an American band is not. Its fact. Nobody is saying they aren't an American band. But here we have a band critics call Christian that tries to distances themselves and says we just want to make music. Yes, they were on a Christian label for a short time with BEC, a Christian sub-label of Tooth & Nail, but now they are simply with Tooth & Nail which is not an official Christian label despite their many Christian artists. -- Noj r (talk) 01:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

You are assuming why they wanted to distance themselves from the Christian marketplace. Again. Unless you have something that makes those references unreliable, we can remove it. Otherwise you're just spinning your wheels. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not assuming anything. The article says they have distanced themselves--you can look it up if you like. Spinning my wheels? I pored over the subject matter and rewrote this entire article. I know what the band thinks and I know what the critics think. There is a controversy. And it has not been resolved. I'm going to see about getting other editors to contribute to this discussion because obviously you will not address valid points. -- Noj r (talk) 05:48, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

You are assuming. It says that they "During this time, Project 86 distanced themselves from the Christian market ... 'to give precedence to their newfound mainstream audience.'". You said that their intention was something other than that. As for a short time, do you mean longer than they had a deal with any mainstream label? They're still signed to Tooth & Nail, a sub-label of the EMI Christian Music Group, and they're marketed to the Christian market 86 ChristianBook.com and MusiChristian.com.

When the band comes out and says "we are not a Christian band and never were" you would have a point about them not being a Christian band.

But yet again, are the sources unreliable? You may feel free to continue to discuss this on your own, but unless you can prove the three references cannot be trusted, they stay. They summarize an aspect of the band, and it is not unreasonable to include the adjective in the lede. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:07, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not disputing the fact that they are marketed as a Christian group and such. I'm not disputing the fact that all these sources say they are a Christian band. However, they are labeling Project 86 a Christian band for the wrong reasons. They are not really Christian band. They just flirt with the Christian music industry. You're right. This is a pretty stupid argument. Project 86 wants to have their cake and eat it too. I don't know why I'm standing up for them when they can't be honest about their beliefs. The Christian adjectives can stay in the lead and infobox. I'm adjusting the sentence in musical style to reflect their on-the-fence attitude. -- Noj r (talk) 07:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, time for someone else to step in here. Project 86 is sourced as a Christian band by multiple different reliable sources, which is the final say on Wikipedia regardless of what we think of it and even regardless of whether it is true or not. Now, Project 86 has at times distanced itself from the Christian market, but before you fault them for that, remember that it is a Christian market, meaning that "Christian" music is an industry just like any other music industry (and I believe it actually is one of the largest.) Which industry the band wants to associated with is its own business. So, basically, while the band has stated that it doesn't want to be pigeon-holed (who does?) and has at times put a distance between itself and the Christian market, does not negate the fact that it is sourced by reliable, verifiable sources as a Christian band. (As an aside, much of the "Christian music" nowadays is like saying that there's "Christian plumbing," it makes a distinction that really is pointless. But my opinion doesn't matter, reliable sources do.)--3family6 (talk) 12:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The problem with the recent change is that it removes the references from the portion of the article it is supposed to be referencing. This is unacceptable bu Wikipedia's standards. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:26, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I've replaced the missing refs, I'm not sure how to split them between the note and ref lists.--3family6 (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm planning on removing the split unless someone can explain how it's better. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I think this argument has been settled regarding their status as a Christian band. The split is there because the article is written in Harvard reference style which I implemented. It is a citation style used by many articles and a personal choice because I believe it is cleaner. If you want to contest it I suggest you start a new discussion about it. -- Noj r (talk) 18:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the argument has been settled, but yet a new editor is coming in and unsettling it. Will have to investigate the Harvard style. We may need to figure out how to get a bot to enforce the style. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not actually sure if "Harvard style" is the correct name to be honest. Regardless, I modeled the citation style after the one used in The Beatles, which is an FA. -- Noj r (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I have added editor comments to the article at the contentious spots to discourage well intentioned users from removing the "Christian" label. -- Noj r (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Just saw that. Thanks! --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:07, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

A discussion between two people does not really constitute consensus about a controversial edit which makes a significant claim. Have you got any sources to cite which explicitly name this a “Christian rock” genre band? Wiki-Coffee ^Talk 07:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

There is a discussion above. Isn't that enough? Would you prefer additional references or a different term? Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:57, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Project 86. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080704082637/http://www.hmmagazine.com/reviews/album/p/project_860204.php to http://www.hmmagazine.com/reviews/album/p/project_860204.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:03, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Project 86. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ccmmagazine.com/news/stories/11606083/project%2086/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ccmmagazine.com/news/stories/11535348/project%2086/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ccmmagazine.com/news/stories/11534999/project%2086%2038th/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090406021825/http://www.hmmagazine.com/exclusive/project_86_the_beginnings200306/index.php to http://www.hmmagazine.com/exclusive/project_86_the_beginnings200306/index.php
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ccmmagazine.com/news/stories/11545253/project%2086/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110610163734/http://www.hmmagazine.com/2009/08/scream-the-prayer-tour-2009-concert-review/ to http://www.hmmagazine.com/2009/08/scream-the-prayer-tour-2009-concert-review/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:03, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey, so it would seem, like the normal Project 86 cycle, the band got new members. There was no announcement, but it would seem that Mike "Norman" Williams is back in the band and Abishai Collingsworth appears to have joined. They also seem to have added on Bassist Josh Hagquist, formerly of Dogwood and The Beautiful Mistake. Thoughts on this? Let me know before I add them. Metalworker14 (Yo) 12 December 2017, 2:16 (UTC)

1) Pretty much all primary sources.

2) Not one clearly indicates the things you claim.

norm_chomskyAnd here's a picture of me getting sunburnt. #spf1000 #project86 #p86 #uprisefest doesn't state that is back in the band.

abishai_jFlying out on Wednesday to play a festival with these boys again. Anybody gonna be hanging at Soulfest? One show means a musician is in the band?

j_hagquistFun shot from somewhere in Europe. With all due respect to American music fans...European music fans are quite a bit more enthusiastic. I said "with all due respect"... #project86 #daaden #musicwithfriends #shakeandbake #thatjusthappened #aykeknows #glguitars #asatdeluxe @arnesteinar @aschwab86 @reinblom @theproject86 @glguitars Where exactly does it say anything about Hagquist joining or even performing with the band.

In short nothing is supported. You're reading between the lines of the second one and in the case of the other two, offering wishful thinking. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:08, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

3) You still insist on capitalizing the instruments ("bassist", not "Bassist"). I've had to fix multiple, multiple articles where you've done this. Read MOS:CAPS. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:08, 14 December 2017 (UTC)