King Diamond

Long discussion on the emerging guidelines for artist vs. band here

Well, as ever it is a long discussion that is almost impenetrable to work out what the decision is. So no help at all. So I'll just leave it.

There's a summary on this thread.

And this is different from Alice Cooper how?

Frankly, the guidelines should breakdown these into major artists, minor artists, and mergers for convenience. Clear cases are separated, minor artists combined, and those merged for convenience include some notice in the comments. When aliases are used, then the combined entry should control the rules regarding duplicates. VV and the VV Trio can't cover the same work.

As others already commented I think we should keep it as an individual instead of a group

Nap if that's your decision, then reject the error report.

I would still interested in the steps and conclusions that resulted in the end decision. We seem to be discussing a minor artist. Are we merging due to being immaterial? Merging for convenience?

Also, the report doesn't appear frivolous and was filed in good faith about an open question. Closing as "processed" seems more appropriate to me.

Last updated by Tar Heel on 2021-01-13 14:38:45 UTC - Show original message

And a third thing, people continue to wonder why Alice Cooper (the band) and Alice Cooper (the related solo performer) are combined while so many others are separated, resulting in the question coming up relatively often, including this thread. If a new contributor asked, I would have no answer.

B... Can you please clarify here, or better yet, post some applicable rule clarification using Cooper as an example?

I can't say much about King Diamond.

But what VV is saying about Alice Cooper is confirmed by a. o. the history page on artist(s) own site and wikipedia.

If I were an editor and I got some report about splitting, my response would be as soon as someone explains the Cooper treatment, I'll let things ride. Thanks for your thoughts though.

Only looked into the A. C. issue to check if I had a personal knowledge gap. Proceding with fundamental matters like splitting artists should always involve the managing editor, though.

Bastien ?

I have just completed three tribute albums to King Diamond and added about ten releases, which reminded me of this thread.

Kim Bendix Petersen happens to go by his alias of King Diamond. He was originally a member of Mercyful Fate and then became a member of a new band called King Diamond, apparently named after his alter ego. This appears to be reflected in how others manage their presentation of these artists.

Discogs distinguishes between King Diamond the individual https://www.discogs.com/artist/465022-King-Diamond-2 and King Diamond the band https://www.discogs.com/artist/252162-King-Diamond

Musicbrainz distinguishes between King Diamond the individual https://musicbrainz.org/artist/02808ac2-15ad-4997-a33c-00ae94203e89 and King Diamond the band https://musicbrainz.org/artist/00565b31-14a3-4913-bd22-385eb40dd13c

Wikipedia distinguishes between King Diamond the individual https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Diamond and King Diamond the band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Diamond_(band)

Metal archive distinguishes between King Diamond the individual https://www.metal-archives.com/artists/King_Diamond/318 and King Diamond the band https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/King_Diamond/255

Spirit of Metal distinguishes between King Diamond the individual https://www.spirit-of-metal.com/en/artist/King_Diamond_(Kim_Bendix_Petersen)/591… and King Diamond the band https://www.spirit-of-metal.com/en/band/King_Diamond

rateyourmusic distinguishes between King Diamond the individual https://rateyourmusic.com/artist/king_diamond_f1 and King Diamond the band https://rateyourmusic.com/artist/king-diamond

I'm sure there must be more.

Only Allmusic seems to show just the individual.

Because of this I am unable to add any artist relation to King Diamond the band for its members as King Diamond is only seen as a person. But he is not a solo performer and never has been, though he is a songwriter with a significant body of work. If his alter ego was King Diamondish and he was in King Diamond then presumably our representation would be different and the two would be separated.

I look at this as a fan and think our approach is obviously wrong and out of step with almost everyone else.

The obvious parallel as mentioned above is Alice Cooper but there are others like Dave Matthews or Tom Robinson. Fans know when a band was a band and when an artist is going it alone and we should be doing our best to reflect that knowledge. It would bring us into line with others.

But I also accept there is no hard and fast rule that we can apply and that there is a need for discretion. For example, Paul Weller fans will not regard The Paul Weller Movement as a band, it only existed for one release and the track appeared later credited just to Paul Weller.

I think it is amazing that we can have had such a long dialogue on this and ended up with a different and, to my mind, very wrong conclusion. I think it is an embarrassment that makes us look ignorant but if that is the look we are happy with then so be it.

Bastien has now been asked to explain the Alice Cooper treatment multiple times, here and elsewhere, with no response. R do WTF you want.

VirileVagabond your omnipresent divise comments are not appreciated. Warning number 1.

Topic is on hold while we define a guideline:

https://secondhandsongs.com/topic/76580

Bastien How is the following divisive?

[B-] has now been asked to explain the Alice Cooper treatment multiple times, here and elsewhere, with no response. R do WTF you want.

That you have not responded is a statement of objective fact. I expressed nor implied any motive, reasons, etc.

Without requested guidance, then it's only logical that editors have discretion until such guidance is provided.

On the other hand, constantly calling (often completely unwarranted) others "inflexible" and now "divisive" is actually divisive, and I'm not the only one who has taken notice.

I'll state here as I have elsewhere, SHS likely outgrew centralized top decision making long ago. How many entries, submissions, reports, and forum posts a day now? How can one person deal with all this timely? Any attempt will likely only fail yet still have negative consequences on your health, mood and "real life".

We Americans have a saying: Justice delayed is justice denied. One can also say: Answers delayed are answered denied. It matters not the reasons for the delay.

This also means that someone like Michael Denner is shown as being in a band with Kim Petersen/King Diamond (the individual) called “Mercyful Fate” but is NOT shown as being in a band with Kim Petersen/King Diamond (the individual) called “King Diamond” despite being the guitarist in both bands. This is inconsistent nonsense and devalues, worse, ignores, his contribution to the latter.

But given the lack of any response to my previous argument (which is why I don’t post much) I don’t hold any hope for a change here. But it would be nice to know that this is because others disagree with me and, more importantly, why.

R... Curious, did B ever explain why Alice Cooper (the solo artist and the band) are combined? Tom Petty and Tom Petty and The Heartbreakers?

Inconsistent nonsense seems like an apt description of the current guideline situation.

Well, as ever it is a long discussion that is almost impenetrable to work out what the decision is. So no help at all. So I'll just leave it.

The guidelines are pretty clear and simple.

Aliases are used for musical formations where there's a clear leader and further membership is not fixed (fluid) or undefined or unknown or irrelevant. These include Trios, Quartets, Orchestras, Choir singers, Projects, etc carrying that leader's name.

Create separate pages for all other cases (Manfred Mann, Sade, Steve Miller Band, etc.) where these bands have (more or less) constant membership.

So Rodders200 you just need to agree with Nap which of the two cases applies in this case.

Whether "pretty clear" or not, it is crystal clear that the exiting guidelines aren't effectively and consistently applied, which means they don't really exist as a practical matter.

Sorry Sebastian, not good enough - that is a disappointing response and is just abdicating responsibility.

It is not an isolated case, there are other examples, so there is a general principle to be decided. If the guidelines were clear and simple then cases like King Diamond and Alice Cooper would not exist.

Nap has already expressed his view to leave it as it is and has only contributed one line to this thread. I have investigated the treatment of this artist elsewhere and made a comprehensive contribution setting out the case for it to be changed. If individual editors cannot agree despite the guidelines and voluminous, compelling evidence to the contrary (none has been provided to justify the current treatment) then it needs adjudication. As a managing editor, you must have an opinion.

As a managing editor, you must have an opinion.

Yes my opinion is follow the guidelines. If the band’s set up is largely fixed and it is recognised as a discrete band, rather than as a vehicle for the lead performer, then it should be set up as a band. Many of these entries were set up before the guidelines came in, so it will take time to work through them in individual cases.

Well, you know very well what I was asking but you have carefully avoided committing to a helpful opinion and seem happy to set editors at odds with one another.

That said, in accordance with the guidelines, I have now created a new artist of "King Diamond [band]" and moved all the releases and performances I have added to be under that name.

I am unable to do anything about the remaining King Diamond releases and performances previously added by Nap as my authorisation level as a "new editor" doesn't allow it. Bastian simply does not respond to anything I say or ask about increasing my authorisation level, but that is another story which I think is unacceptable.

The consequence is that we now have two different treatments of this artist, one of which is in accordance with the guideline and the other not. I will leave it to you to lodge error reports with Nap. Remember that as well as changing the release and performances the artist entry needs to change to "King Diamond [person]" or similar.

Also in accordance with the guidelines I have created another new artist of "Alice Cooper [band]" which should be used for all releases up until 1973's "Muscle of Love" album. My authorisation level doesn't allow me to correct any of these pre-73 releases and performance which have all been created by other editors so the new artist is currently empty. I will leave it to you to lodge error reports with all the editors who are affected.

Sebastian, reading the last couple of posts, Paul apparently and after having spent quite some time on researching and defining details for the artists in question, here, was asking for your Managing Editor case-related and determining position rather than generalized references to the guidelines.

In other words: If Bastien (who manages Alice Cooper) currently seems to have no capacities to reply and Nap (being in charge of King Diamond) doesn't respond, Paul, IMO rightly, seeks for an in concreto Managing Editor evaluation he shouldn't be denied.

Last updated by camembert electrique on 2021-09-21 03:20:03 UTC - Show original message

Sorry for not showing up for a while

If it's clear (and important sites like Discogs, Wikipedia agree) that the band King Diamond has consistent line-ups, I agree that we should have both the musician and the band

Updated my entries

Many thanks. I appreciate you making the changes.

Just a general observation.... I'm seeing the evolution of a new "too much trouble" exception to the guidelines. This is evidenced by Alice Cooper remaining combined and the original editor position regarding:

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/40236

I no longer have a dog in most fights, but something the editors and CCs likely need to keep an eye on....

Sebastian

I see you have not reacted to this development at all. It is all very frustrating. I get a load of trivial error reports you from which I learn nothing and you could easily correct yourself. These are often about additional data rather than an actual mistake or error. To my mind these should at least be separated between things that are wrong and things that are missing.

But when it comes to (in my view) quite a significant error i.e. the complete mischaracterisation of an artist, there is nothing, you are silent.

So I ask you directly - as a Managing Editor, and given the guidelines you cite above, what do you believe is the right treatment of Alice Cooper pre- and post-1973, and why?

Paul

Paul

Bastien asked the Alice Cooper question on the forum back in March and I replied there that the band and artist should be split. Other editors, managing or otherwise, also gave their view. I’d recommend continuing the discussion in the dedicated forum topic specifically on his question.

Sebastian

Why didn’t you say that before?

Issue resolved, report can be closed?

No.

Absolutely not resolved as, even if we have agreed on the correct treatment, none of the releases that should be attributed to Alice Cooper, the band, have been changed. This includes at least three albums and one single that are managed by you. Sebastian has ignored my suggestion that he do it or file more of his error reports.

It is no more than a five minute job as the artist has already been created. I, of course, can not do it myself as I don’t have the editorial privilege, but then you are familiar with that already.

To me, Paul's reasoning seems completely right.

Paul, it might help if you linked to the actual releases in question as Bastien (or others) likely added them ages ago...

That’s a good suggestion. Affected releases are all those up to 1973. By my reckoning these are:

Pretties for You - Nap

Easy Action - Nap

Love It to Death - Bastien

Killer - Bastien

School's Out - Bastien

Billion Dollar Babies - Bastien

Muscle of Love - Nap

Eighteen - Bastien

Nobody Likes Me - me

Elected - Canary

Hello Hurray - Bastien

Issue resolved, report can be closed?

Still work to do by the looks of it Bastien Nap Canary camembert electrique

I think mine is ok.