So at what point are bands considered technically inactive, or "On Hold", to use site terms? I point to someone like {29701}, who, acording to their linked website, haven't had a gig in 6 years, or released material in 12. Somehow, that doesn't strike me as active, but at the same time, they've never said anything about being over, or on break, or anything, really.

Is it our call to make? Or perhaps something like changing status to Unknown, and listing in the additional notes something explaining the situation?

I'll throw my two cents in here and say that I go ahead and change bands' statuses to "unknown" (note: never "split-up", unless the band claims so themselves) if they haven't updated their social networking sites in three-four years, or otherwise if the members have withdrawn from the metal scene and said nothing for quite a while, if the email addresses are dead, and so on. If there are stranger circumstances regarding a band's silence, I'd consider it okay to mark a band's status as "unknown" in a shorter amount of time (for example, Torsofuck, whose second album was reportedly almost done, and then they went silent for a year and eventually deleted their own Facebook page with no explanation as to why). Either way, I agree with you - I think there are way too many bands marked as "active" on MA, especially ones that have been quiet since 2004 if not earlier. It's best to avoid jumping to conclusions in matters like this, though.

The most important point about a status is whether the band has announced or made known that their status is active, split-up, or on hold. There must be something as a legit band source to be one of these three. When you do not know, and the band has given no answer after a fair amount of time, then it should be marked "Unknown." It's very important, however, that if you do this that you research the band beforehand and TRY to get in contact with the band as much as possible. When it comes to this site, we'd much rather have outdated info then incorrect info, and ideally info that is not based upon your own assumptions.

well, what I have been meaning to ask is, what about the band who has long broken up who decides to re-unite for just one show, or maybe for a short mini-tour. For example, they havent recorded any material since the Reagan administration, haven't toured since the advent of the Grunge era and have, by their own admission, been defunct for over 20 years but- let's say they decide to play a "reunion" gig for old time sake. Just one gig- then go their separate ways again. I know this is probably splitting hairs but, I have seen a lot of old bands do this and get their status changed to "active" even though the band never had any real intention of doing anything together other than just play that one reunion show. I've been meaning to ask about this for a while actually.

I'd leave it at "split-up" in that case. It can be difficult to determine sometimes whether it's a nostalgic, short-lived "reunion" or a "real" one, so that's probably why you've seen some bands changed to "active" again. I was unsure about this myself for some time. One-time shows for old times' sake can be mentioned in the additional notes.

EDIT: Another useful indicator is probably whether the band is writing new material or just performing old stuff.