Five days ago Australian Dieblod (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4Zti8rIj9E) has been rejected by Emptiness Cycle for "Not a metal band; does not belong on Encyclopaedia Metallum. Please read (or re-read) our rules next time to see what qualifies as metal."

Today the band was added and submitted by the same Emptiness Cycle.

What has changed then?

When I got the sample through, I didn't hear metal riffs. When I got a copy of the full release today, It was clearly metal. This is a simple case of the track linked on the submission not being a good representation of the band's overall sound. I hadn't anything else to compare it to.

Once I realised it was eligible, I white-listed it and added it. If this isn't the correct policy, I will inform you on here, as this is an area still relatively new to me. Thanks for alerting it to me.

UPDATE : I've restored your submission and deleted mine. This was a case of not being au fait with the best practice. Thanks for giving me the chance to sort this out.

Okay.

Another question regarding the digital albums that could be a valid reason for submitting the band. The rules say: "The album must be a full-length. There is no hard-defined cut-off, as that would be arbitrary: a good guideline, however, would be roughly 30 minutes of original material." Last week I did not submit the band, which has a digital album on bandcamp, which lasts 25:29, but the band was added by another member, and was successfully submitted. So what is the needed minimum length of the digital release, in order the band could be submitted? Have I unofficially read somewhere that the release must no shorted than 20 minutes?

We've been needing to update those guidelines for some time, but the "spirit" of those guidelines remain true: digital albums used for getting a band accepted as digital-only should be comparable to a professional full-length/EP physical release. This means having a fixed tracklist, having cover art, being a final mix, and having a reasonable amount of metal music. Ideally the more metal music on a release, the better, which is why the rules give the ideal of a 30 minute full-length release. But, that said, we wont use that as an absolute arbitrary cut-off, and it could be argued that having such a cut-off unfairly limits the scope of our work in the first place. So, in practice, if all other factors are met for what we consider a professional release then we are comfortable accepting releases around the 20 minute mark. Maybe even lower. We also recognize that certain genres, like grindcore, naturally have low lengths for the nature of their full-lengths, as well. So, to summarize, we generally ballpark the minimal length somewhere around 20 minutes in practice, though ideally would like to see more. And, longer is usually almost always better for proving the case for getting it accepted.

I should emphasize that when we talk about length what we're talking about is the length of original metal music. An album that only contains a minimal of metal music on it, despite the length of the overall release, will be - of course - denied. Our judgment always comes down to the metal music, and whether the album is predominantly metal.

Does this make sense? We apologize for any confusion or miscommunication.

20 minutes of metal - that's where I will concentrate on, probably. Thanks.

Hails.

Sorry for the repost, but I got no answer

Recently I wanted to submit a Mexican Post Black metal band called Toxocracia, But I noticed that is Blacklisted and I don't know why...
These are some of the stuff of the band:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-dONppfLjM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmNxKtALoI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgqBzYAaO2I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TBSa1r1rO8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwXxVS30p5o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5Jdd97LkSw

The band also has released a full album with good sound quality available here:
https://toxocracia.bandcamp.com/releases
https://www.cdbaby.com/cd/toxocracia

There can be found information and tracks of the band here:
https://soundcloud.com/toxocracia
http://www.spirit-of-metal.com/groupe-g ... -l-es.html

There can be found the entire album at these distro:
http://depressiveillusions.com/items/cd ... cia-eterna
http://www.rigorismprod.ru/_CD-R_P-T.html

And this is the Official Facebook site of the band:
https://www.facebook.com/Toxocracia/

The band has way enough metalness to apear in this site and has also decent studio quality audio.
Thanks for reading.

Hi
We are a band drawing much influences from S.O.B,S.O.D, Discharge, GISM etc. and filling much thrash/blackened crustie metal riffs way more than punk riffs. Please DO NOT bother listening to our album and CHECK OUT IF WE ARE A METAL BAND before rejecting us based on our logo or profile picture. As we see the aforementioned bands are easily listed on Metal-Archives, so do we.

The blacklisted page:
http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Dis ... 3540426607

Our album <The Greatest Outrageous Famine (極餓非道)>
https://disanxiancrust.bandcamp.com/alb ... ous-famine


中國暴力激流選集​(​True Thrash Fest​/​Grind Freaks JP Promo)
https://disanxiancrust.bandcamp.com/alb ... s-jp-promo

Any one?

That's not how it works. If you feel your band meets criteria, add it to the site. This is not a screening area.
Thank you.

Okay, I'm going in!


Whitelisted.

The Autist: Whitelisted.


More hc/powerviolence than metal.


Seems so, I'll ask for more thoughts on this one.


I dunno, sounds more like heavy rock to me. Packs a punch, but the riffs seem more rock than metal.


Whitelisted.


Whitelisted.


Whitelisted.


Sounds like sludgy post-hardcore/noise rock.


Whitelisted for re-eval.


Is there a way to check the entire release?


Whitelisted.


Eterna seems quite light on metal riffing.


Restored.


The reason wasn't lack of release, but the band being more ambient than metal (telling from the blacklist note).


I'm not very good with these, I'll ask for more opinions.


As always, if I missed someone, repost.

Duuude!

Never tell him the odds.

Did anyone by chance check this out? I added the quote just so the link could be bumped as well.

I tried, but "This video is not available."

Odd, I was able to view each video in the playlist. When I did it, I went to the link and hit 'play all' and was able to get it to work.

It's probably a location thing.

Hi, the band "Diphyllobothrium" from France has been rejected.
I'm sorry to submit a lot of non-acceptable bands. Why this one is rejected? Bad sound quality? "Non-metal riffs"?
Thanks.

Did you even bother to read the rejection message before asking in here?

Yes "Not a metal band", I just want more precisions about the rejection.

Hi! About Omniscience: http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Omn ... 3540420083

Now, say it's more ambient than metal. Really??????? Please, hear this urls!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWuOXD6r8e8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaYSmVqlvVY

And the band Valiant from USA http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Valiant/3540408068 it's the same kind of music, and Archon, the leader of Valiant, it's the Omniscience's drummer. Check here: https://www.facebook.com/omniscienceeab ... 73/?type=3

Why Valiant was accepted and Omniscience not? Please hear the URLS, and pay attention. It's Epic/Atmospheric both the bands!

Read the first fucking post.

5. Comparing bands (don't)

This may seem like the obvious course of action in some cases, but be advised that we generally frown upon arguments like "you have band A listed and band B is similar, hence you must also accept band B". Please avoid this, as it comes with the following problems:
1) We simply do not work that way. Each band is assessed and judged on its own merit and trying to compare two distinct bands is treacherous business, even if they may sound similar. And if the two are indeed sonic carbon copies, perhaps the listed one should be deleted instead.
2) Since the site lists a (very) small number of non-metal exceptions, one might be tempted to use them as a reference point. However, these are exactly that, exceptions, and not subject to our guidelines on music.
3) Slippery slope. We do not want to base further inclusions solely on one or more listed band(s) that might be questionable or were wrongly approved to begin with. We would rather (re-)assess the proposed inclusion and the compared listed band(s) on their own instead of expanding a part of the database based around repeated instances of a resigned "we'll, we have this, why not this as well?". See item 1).
4) Most importantly, the Archives can in some ways be seen as a database of metal releases rather than bands. What that means is that in order to gain entry, a band only needs one predominantly metal release (ideally a full-length), regardless of the rest of their discography. This can result in bands starting out as metal, but changing to non-metal later or the reverse. More subtle cases exist, with bands being listed based on a (possibly lesser-known) fraction of their discography. So how does this connect to comparing bands? Well, it's simple: Since we judge releases, comparing band A as a whole to band B as a whole is a fallacious argument when one is actually comparing non-metal output of band A (accepted based on their metal output) to non-metal output of band B (unacceptable because they have no metal output). Consider it one level above arguing that band B should be included because they have a few songs as metal as band A's releases.

So again, each band is judged individually and we don't do the blind approach "A, hence also B".

About Omniscience: www.metal-archives.com/bands/Omniscience/3540420083

Okay! I apologize to the comparation of the bands.

Now, about the changing of Country, Omniscience it's now International. Archon it's the Omniscience's drummer and from Albuquerque, USA. The other members it's from Brazil. Check this URL: https://www.facebook.com/omniscienceeab ... 73/?type=3

The physical stuff:
https://scontent-gru2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=59744D94
https://scontent-gru2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=59BE786D
https://scontent-gru2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=59BF9521
https://scontent-gru2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=597553A6

Please list this URLS. It's metal.
Now, say it's more ambient than metal. Really??????? Please, hear this urls!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWuOXD6r8e8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaYSmVqlvVY

I don't know what I need to do, seriously.

Buckshot Facelift can now be submitted.

Blacklisting of Disanxian stands. Too punk.

Any chance of whitelisting Hadal (Melbourne) on the basis of their 2017 releases..?

https://hadalsounds.bandcamp.com/track/perineum
https://hadalsounds.bandcamp.com/track/cloaca
https://hadalsounds.bandcamp.com/track/chadal

Hi, I'm sorry but I do not agree. Erdve's music by no means can be defined only as post-hardcore. The core basis and concept evolves around black metal, sludge, doom, post-metal, hardcore and whatever else that is ,,extreme'' and indefinitely heavy.

Based on your logic, how come you have bands like Neurosis, Amenra, Isis, Celeste, Tesa, Knut and even Kowloon Walled City? Even Oxbow? Their genre variety cannot even be defined properly. It seems that you have to revise the criteria that you rate bands upon, unless you have a personal dislike for the bands that you blacklist.

Waiting for your feedback, thanks!

Your ignorance is palpable. And again, failure to read the rules before disparaging the staffers:

5. Comparing bands (don't)

This may seem like the obvious course of action in some cases, but be advised that we generally frown upon arguments like "you have band A listed and band B is similar, hence you must also accept band B". Please avoid this, as it comes with the following problems:
1) We simply do not work that way. Each band is assessed and judged on its own merit and trying to compare two distinct bands is treacherous business, even if they may sound similar. And if the two are indeed sonic carbon copies, perhaps the listed one should be deleted instead.
2) Since the site lists a (very) small number of non-metal exceptions, one might be tempted to use them as a reference point. However, these are exactly that, exceptions, and not subject to our guidelines on music.
3) Slippery slope. We do not want to base further inclusions solely on one or more listed band(s) that might be questionable or were wrongly approved to begin with. We would rather (re-)assess the proposed inclusion and the compared listed band(s) on their own instead of expanding a part of the database based around repeated instances of a resigned "we'll, we have this, why not this as well?". See item 1).
4) Most importantly, the Archives can in some ways be seen as a database of metal releases rather than bands. What that means is that in order to gain entry, a band only needs one predominantly metal release (ideally a full-length), regardless of the rest of their discography. This can result in bands starting out as metal, but changing to non-metal later or the reverse. More subtle cases exist, with bands being listed based on a (possibly lesser-known) fraction of their discography. So how does this connect to comparing bands? Well, it's simple: Since we judge releases, comparing band A as a whole to band B as a whole is a fallacious argument when one is actually comparing non-metal output of band A (accepted based on their metal output) to non-metal output of band B (unacceptable because they have no metal output). Consider it one level above arguing that band B should be included because they have a few songs as metal as band A's releases.

So again, each band is judged individually and we don't do the blind approach "A, hence also B".

Thank you for explaining the rule, I admit I didn't read it, for this apologize. Yet, this argumentation is valid just because you have the rule set like that. You cannot expect zero reaction, because what you are doing is disregarding the effort of artists, that do honestly believe, that metal is the main core for their music (not just a song in a release, or some historical relations when making first demo's).

I reacted because I'm looking for more thorough reasoning rather than, like-wise palpable ignorance such as just saying ,,It's Post-Hardcore'', which makes me think if anyone has actually listened to the album.

Erdve - Vaitojimas, is most definitely a metal release, combining the heaviest spectrum and conceptual themes that I'm afraid no other scene or people would able to accept nor understand. So, would be happy to discuss further whether it fits your ,,metal'' criteria.

After a quick sampling on Bandcamp, I agree with Erdve's original blacklisting. It's heavy, but it veers more in a sludgy, dark hardcore direction. It's often a fine line between these bands and what we consider acceptable (i.e. metal riff-based) post-metal/atmospheric sludge/etc., but we have to draw it somewhere.

Hadal: Well um, a couple of single tracks, essentially, and none sound predominantly metal by a long shot.

Thank you for listening and clarifying. I understand, you have to stick to the idea of your archive and keep the genre clean. It seems, exclusion is a tool to contribute to the scene these days. Could be a good topic for ,,The Hard Times''.

A huge disappointment, being a follower of this archive for 10 years to find out it is purely personal opinion based.

Not true. Decisions are made as a collective mod effort.

You have the right to disagree. We don't claim to be peerless gods incapable of miscategorization from time to time, and implying that we intermittently toss the rules into the wind just to screw with users isn't just ignorant - it's insulting.

Well, in the end it all comes down to opinions, albeit informed ones. It's music, not arithmetic. We try to get a wider staff consensus for the trickier cases, try to ask fellow staffers for more thoughts if we aren't sure, but obviously it's not feasible to call in 10 mods for every single band. Judgement calls have to be made. How else did you think we were operating?

We are the MA staff. Meet our standards and submit your bands. We will add your band's metalogical and musicological distinctiveness to our own. Your metal culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.

Azmobot, please return to Section 10 for re-examination. There is a critical error in our neural net. An intruder has discovered that we do not, in fact, base our decisions on the aggregate of all the bands intelligently separated into genres as defined by itself. Our secrets have been found. Existence, as we know it, is over.

Waiting my responses!

Hey for the band called furfur from france,
the CD was made, I know you told me that there was little chance that the group would be accepted. I still share it here.
https://www.facebook.com/47365304632813 ... =3&theater

The band Nexcoyotl was rejected because the band is not Black Metal, but the track have Black Metal Riff and grim vocals

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6B0frWRNjc

However, I rejected it as the full tape you linked clearly wasn't, and this track is a stand alone track that has nothing to do with the original submission.

You can stop asking. The answer is no.

I did the original blacklisting so I'll quote myself to put an end to this, for the record this means don't ask again:

Just saw this. Ok, thanks man.

Wormwitch was previously blacklisted for being too crusty, but I think that should be re-evaluated with the release of their new album:

http://wormwitch.com/album/strike-mortal-soil

There is still definitely a strong d-beat backbone, but with this album they add a lot of doom and black metal, have solid metal riffs, blastbeats, and much more of a clear metal sound than bands like Xibalba. Motorhead + Black Breath + Take Over and Destroy, to my ears.