This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles 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.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to
comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the
current tasks, visit the
notice board,
the attached article or discuss it at the
project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
"In 2005,
Q magazine included "Batdance" in a list of "Ten Terrible Records by Great Artists", even though Q gave the whole album 5 stars when first reviewed."
I'm removing this because it's a silly, shallow criticize from an obviously inconsistent music magazine; I don't consider listing "Ten Terrible Records by Great Artists" to be good or interesting--or even notable or popular--music writing and it's definately not significant or objective enough to included here. Proclaiming records as "terrible" in little lists in magazines is ridiculous to begin with, but adding them to encyclopedias just annoys me intensely. Where is the relevance to the article? Some (bad) music critics think the song is "terrible"; what does this tell us about the song? Nothing. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
12.76.178.120 (
talk •
contribs) 03:10, 4 July 2006
You may not consider Q magazine to be notable or popular music writing, but it is one of the most notable and widely-read music magazines in the world. To answer your question, the relevance to the article is to show the critical reception the song received. I would re-add the sentence, but I can't find a citation for it.
Markfury3000 (
talk)
14:34, 3 December 2009 (UTC)reply