Most of these rules are fairly obvious, but they are all very important. Not following the guidelines may result in a simple rejection of your submission. Please take the time to read them all at least once– it’s not that long, and it will save you a lot of time than if you just ignore them and take the time to fill out a submission that will only get rejected!
BE WARNED: Depending on the gravity of your offense, repeating your infractions might go from making you lose all your points
to get your account deleted and your ass banned from the Encyclopaedia Metallum!
We have little tolerance for abuse and bullshit. Our system is not a kid's playground. Behave decently and intelligently or
suffer the consequences. Constantly abuse our system and we might even report you to your ISP.
Regarding band submissions: note that if we find errors that we can quickly correct and edit
(slips can be forgiven, so long as they do not become a habit), and that the overall submission is valid, we will accept it – but any
submission may be modified or corrected if we feel it’s necessary.
Thank you
for understanding.
This was not part of the original guidelines, for the simple reason that we thought it was a no-brainer, but apparently
some people are either fucking ignorant, or just plain assholes. If you submit a review that was published on
another website, you are more than welcome to send it to us - as long as it is YOUR review! Stealing other
people's writing is unacceptable and the Encyclopaedia Metallum will not stand for any of it. Worse yet, is that some
(former) users not only plagiarize reviews, but instead of admitting it when they were caught, they actually lied about it
and claimed they were the same author under a different identity.
This also includes written content for band information. Do not, we repeat, do NOT, copy and paste a biography or some similar text from another website such as BNR or Tartarean Desire, nor any text from the official or unofficial site of the band. Link to the bio if you think it particularly informative (if it's on a specific site, link to the site instead, however), but those who get caught pasting the bios will catch HELL to pay!
Plagiarism is evil. We have zero tolerance for this, and these warnings are explicit enough. It doesn't matter if you submitted a review that's not yours even if you gave credit, because the points will go to you and the review will still be listed under your name. Simply put, do not add a review you are not the author of, or you will lose your account and get banned immediately!
Needless to say (so why am I writing this? apparently some people are so fucking stupid they can't grasp the concept), you are not allowed to sabotage band information by entering stupid/false/derogatory information, adding fake albums/links, deleting valid links and so on. Do that and we'll simply fix the info, delete your account instantly and permanently ban your sorry ass.
It's rather sad that we have to actually write that down, simply because of a few juvenile assholes.
Be reasonable for the data you enter in the additional notes. It clearly says "no personal opinions", yet we still see submissions where it says things like "Awesome brutal band for all death metal fans!", or "their talent has brought them much recognition in their home country" and the likes. Why people do that when it's clearly written right above the text box to not write any non-neutral information is truly anyone's guess.
On the {\link syntax (more on this here): it's always interesting to see in which band(s) a band member has played, or what other bands are related to the band in question.
On the "not to be confused" issue:
Seems like some of you love your score. You love it so much, that even though you are in the top 5 of the user rankings, and have had Veteran access for months now, you still get off seeing your score increase, and gasp in horror if it should ever decrease. You could lose 2000+ points and still keep your ranking, but it would still be a tragedy.
So you decide to be cute, and bloat your score in every possible way with worthless updates. This is called Point Whoring. It includes, but is probably not limited to, the following:
Everyone can contribute links to websites related to a band. Do not, however, add a link to the main page of a site such as "Headbanger's Delight" to every single band that sells merchandise there. If you do that you could at least link to the page with the actual band merchandise. For example, link to something like www.headbanger.net/bandname/, or www.sitename.com/band.ext?id=666 - i.e., a direct link to a band page. Linking to the label or store's main page is useless!
For those with the Veteran rank: you may update URLs or delete broken links. Do not delete valid links! You are allowed to delete broken, false or unrelated links, to keep the integrity of the information. Deleting valid links just for the hell of it, or to spite the owner of the linked site, or whatever stupid reason, is LAME and will not be tolerated. If this becomes problematic, we'll simply prevent users other than the moderators from deleting links. Sad but true.
That’s
a no-brainer, obviously. But it will happen that users will submit bands
that we are not familiar with, and we’ll just have to take their words for it!
We don’t have the time to verify every entry, but if we feel something is
suspicious we will double-check. Also, other users may report false information
in entries as well as they can report mistakes. We also feel that if you would
take the time to fill out a submission with garbage just to spam us, you need
to grow the fuck up.
Keep in mind that if there is only the minimal information, and no link or album title,
and searching Google yields no results, then we have no proof this band even exists! Therefore,
do not be surprised if we reject it!
We want and welcome opinions – for the reviews section! In the band encyclopaedia,
the description needs to be as neutral as possible. For example, in the “genre”
field, do not fill out “kick-ass TRUE black metal” or “wimpy keyboard-based goth
fag music”. Keep that for the reviews. And even there, try to be more original
(just a suggestion…).
Do NOT write stuff, in the lineup or notes fields or anywhere else, that promotes or bashes
the band in question! Do not write a biography in the first person, e.g. "This is my band we formed
last year, we sound like band X and draw influences from Y, etc etc". That kind of text will just
get edited out.
If you add a band, you do NOT have to enter all the releases or albums at once. It would be absurd, because of course you might forget an early demo you didn’t know of, a live album, or better yet, the band might just release other albums after that so it would be a moot point. However, when you add an album, make sure you got all the necessary information and all the tracks, or else just don’t bother. (Song lengths are optional – but try to be consistent, if you want to include the song length, do so for every song on the album, for example.) Do NOT add an album with a bunch of nameless tracks! If you don't have at least the tracklisting, just wait until you do or don't bother!
All kinds of releases listed on the site (if you're too lazy to check, they're full-length albums,
live albums, singles, EPs, DVDs, VHS videos, demos, split albums) can be added. That means NO bootlegs nor "Various artists"
kind of compilations. A split album cannot have more than 5 participating bands, or else it sort of
falls under the "VA compilation" category... For splits, use the "Add a split album" button if possible, so that
if you add it for one band, it's also added for the other band(s). If the band's tracklisting is shuffled though (ie
track 1 is Band X, track 2 is Band Y, track 3 is Band X and so forth), you can add them twice, like a regular album.
Do NOT add several versions of the same release, especially if it's just a single! Some exceptions can be made for
certain re-releases that truly have new stuff other than say, a different artwork or bonus tracks (for example,
Running Wild's Heavy Metal Like a Hammerblow). But avoid those as much as
possible.
For upcoming albums: PLEASE wait until the album is released on the market before adding it. Do not add upcoming albums, unless all the information (release date, tracklisting and cover art) is 100% confirmed by MORE than one source. This is valid for bands that are already on the site only, do not submit new bands that have no releases even if there's a confirmed upcoming album.
NEVER add albums with an empty or incomplete tracklisting.
...Or close enough.
As simple as this request may be, it involves a huge debate. None of us here think
we’re a supreme authority on all things heavy metal. However, since someone has
to draw a line somewhere – after all, if we accepted just about anything it
wouldn’t be the Encyclopaedia Metallum anymore – we’ll have to be the one
to decide whether or not your submission is valid. So this is perhaps the most
important point (other than truthful information), because it can save some
people a lot of time they would spend on a submission that will simply get
rejected. At worst, non-neutral descriptions can be edited, but this is
different.
Now...
Now, as mentioned earlier, we do not know all the bands in existence. If you wish to submit a band local to your area that is not very well-known even among metalheads, you’re more than welcome. But we may have never heard them, or of them, and we cannot always know for sure if they’re really a metal band or not, so we’ll have to take your word for it. So if you aren't sure, you can always ask us, or other people, before spending time to submit the band. At worst, someone may report a band that shouldn't be here, but that escaped the moderator's notice.
We ask this, not because we’re so insecure that we’ll go crazy if we ever learn there’s <gasp> one band that was accepted by mistake, but we just don’t want any “Hey, they’re not metal and they are on your site, why isn’t band X too?” reactions.
(Warning: long rambling ahead, but before you start complaining to us, read this...)Now... let us elaborate on certain things which are apparently controversial, ambiguous or unclear to some members.
- Mötley Crüe, Deep Purple, Rainbow and Rush are not considered metal by some. Understandable, as their music and heaviness
varied and was debatable at times. But what they sometimes lacked in "metalness", they made for in historical importance,
and they are there to stay. That doesn't mean we're going to accept any glam or hippie rock bands though, and they are
about as "borderline" as we are going to have.
They are exceptions. You might not agree. Tough shit. :p
- Side-projects are a big debate. When does a band stop being one and starts being a full-time band? What's the difference
between a solo career and a side-project, etc. Now, a side-project is a band started in parallel to another band.
This is not the same thing as a band member leaving a band and forming a new one, or to join another band! For example,
Soulfly is no more a side-project of Max Cavalera as Voivod is a side-project of Jason Newsted.
One
might argue that a band can start as such but can stop being one if the main band splits-up. Or that while it's reasonable
to have Wongraven or Chaostar, that a country band started by a Flotsam & Jetsam member would simply look out of place on a metal site.
Our answer is that we have no choice but to go with a case by case approach. It might be a little arbitrary, but it's hard
to define a rule that will apply for every case of a non-metal side-project. Yes, that might mean you'll have to ask us
before submitting this guy's side-project. Usually there shouldn't be any problem, but if the side-project really has
nothing to do with the heavy metal scene and/or would really look out of place here, chances are, it won't be accepted.
- Additionally, there will be some non-metal bands featured on the site that we feel are still part of the metal scene despite not
being metal themselves (usually darkwave, ambient, neo-classical and/or folk bands, examples being Mortiis, Elend, Autumn Tears, Stille Volk, etc).
These bands are selected by the moderators in an admittedly arbitrary fashion, and their submission by normal users is discouraged.
Please bear with us on this.
Be careful if you submit a band with an ambiguous genre!
Over the past months we've sometimes seen some bands listed as a genre that would seem fitting, but upon hearing the
actual band we've had some pretty bad surprises... So consider the following genres to be "ambiguous", in the sense that
if we see a band with one of these terms in their genre field, we WILL have to hear the band, or at least read more
than one detailed review, before accepting it.
Hopefully this is clear enough! If you have any questions, you can ask the moderators on the message board, but
some of us are sick of repeating ourself, so don't take it personally if we don't answer your "Why do you say nu-metal
isn't metal?!" or whatever. Keep in mind that the rules of what is accepted or not were ultimately decided by
HellBlazer (the mastermind and founder of the Encyclopaedia) and "put on paper" (or rather, screen?) by Morrigan
(the co-webmaster).
The moderators have given counsel and suggestions but they merely enforce the rules - some of them don't agree
with them 100%, but they will do their job! However, they are only humans, and they all have slightly different opinions.
Nobody asks you to completely agree with us. A lot of these decisions could be debated for hours (time that few of us have). Definitions
aren't always set in stone, and this is just a website to allow people to lookup information - no need throw a fit because
a band you wanted there didn't make it... :) Please understand that we try our best to not have double-standards, but
what may seem like an inconsistency to you would make perfect sense to another and so on. We cannot please everyone.
Please, try to avoid spelling mistakes. We realize that most people often don't take the time to really type well on the Internet, but this is not a chatroom or a message board, and you should take what you submit seriously enough to at least write properly. This goes especially for song titles. Try to respect the punctuation and proper capitalization too. If the songs are in a foreign language, make sure the spelling is accurate. After all, what good is an encyclopaedia if it’s filled with typos? We wouldn’t want anyone to check out Vintersorg’s discography for a song title to download or to sample, and then find nothing in his search because the song was misspelled, would we? We could correct mistakes before accepting the submissions, but we are not automatic correctors and we don’t have the time to constantly double-check other users’ submissions, so we nicely ask that you save us this trouble.
And please don't enter the names/titles all in caps, or all in lowercase (unless the song was
originally spelled that way)!
Tip: band names and song/album titles generally have the first letter of each word capitalized (except for acronyms obviously),
except for small words like "the" and "of" (unless of course they start the title).
So it's "Cradle of Filth", "Council of the Fallen", not "Cradle Of Filth" or "Council Of The Fallen".
Be warned - if you submit a band with the info and/or albums and/or song titles ALL IN CAPS, the moderators
might not want to waste their time to edit it all out for you, and might simply reject your submission!
Another thing, when entering the line-up, use the real name of the instruments!
It's "vocals, guitars, bass and drums", not "regurgitated vokills", "666 shredding strings of doom", "baritone cacophony" and "pounding rhythms of madness"
or *insert pretentious/dumb metaphore here*.
First, the band must have at least released SOME material. If you don't even have a physical demo... forget it. The band might
have been formed, even got a logo, but how will we know that they won't just disband before even recording any song?
An mp3 or two on MySpace or mp3.com-like websites is not enough. The band must have a demo out - this is the minimum.
If you want to add your band, and you *know* you will release something soon, simply wait until it's released before submitting it!
It would be best if there is mention of the band anywhere on the Web, even if it's just a demo review. Otherwise, it could
be a joke band and we have no way of knowing. If you have complete line-up information and/or album titles with tracklisting,
even if there is no mention anywhere else on the Internet (that'll mean the Encyclopaedia will have the exclusive information!
;)), it's already better than just the minimal information with no
album.
As this rule was added several months after the site's launch, it's possible that some bands already on the Encyclopaedia
are breaking it. If you KNOW a band listed here that virtually doesn't exist, feel free to report it.
(Note that 0 results
on Google might not prove it doesn't exist, but it doesn't mean it never existed either - it just helps us if we see a mention
somewhere on the Web...)
If the band is not mentioned anywhere on the Web, or if you cannot prove that they have a physical release by using Web links alone, the best ways to prove that they have a physical release is by making a scan or photography of:
Don't ever keep submitting the same band repeatedly.
Chances are, that if you did not select the notify option, and it is rejected, then - wouldn't you know it - you were not
notified! Therefore, don't assume we want to hear of it some more.
If a band is pending acceptance, it will not disappear out of the queue - so there is no need to keep spamming us with the same band over and over again. And if we rejected it once, we will reject it again, unless it was clearly a mistake the first time (which actually rarely happens). If, for some reason, you believe your band submission did not go through because you got a blank screen or something after your submission, you may ask us on the board if it made it, before posting it again if it didn't.
So there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to submit a band twice. If you do so by accident, that's acceptable, but it's hard to double-post something two days apart.
If a band changes name, there will be two (or more) entries on the site, provided that they have releases under each name. So if you know of a band that has a new name, please wait until they actually have released something under that name before making a new submission. For example, we have entries for both Kreator and Tormentor, but not one for Tyrant (as they were previously called) because they never released anything under that name.
Please, when you review an album, try to stick to the album content. It doesn't matter how well written it is, how poetic it sounds, how original it is, if all you do is make silly metaphors that go nowhere mean nothing. It might sound a silly thing to ask for, but such reviews sadly exist. Reviews should give the listeners and the band's fans a good idea of what the album sounds like, not show off one's English vocabulary.
Did we mention this yet? Well, it also means, lashing out on a band's image or attitude is not exactly a good idea either. That doesn't mean we'll refuse a review if you attack a band's image or integrity - in fact, sometimes such things do need to be pointed out and attacked. But a review based mostly on that is of little interest. Cradle of Filth reviews should be for those who might want to check out the albums, and the fans expecting a new album: they don't want to hear, again, how much you think they're "goth fags"; they don't want to hear, again, how arrogant and pretentious Yngwie Malmsteem is, or how much you don't like Jon Schaffer's attitude, or how hot Tarja Turunen is, or how dumb you think Christians/Satanists/etc are, or how narrow-minded black metal elitists are. If you think it's relevant to the actual album content, by all means feel free to point it out, but don't dwell on it.
Note: here, the "music" includes everything about the album content, be it composition, instrumentation, singing, lyrics, production, atmosphere, emotions, ideas and themes, structure, and so on. It's not exclusively about the notes played and the RIFFS, DUDE!!1, or if each song "rules" or "sucks". Tell us about the overall content, not just the aesthetics.
If you hated an album with a passion, go ahead and flame it - just do it intelligently, and don't just
cuss it out without giving good reasons (i.e., reasons that have to do with the album's music, production and
overall quality). "It sucks, that band is fucking gay, the singer sucks dick" - nope, don't even think about it.
And no, this isn't censorship - we freely accept any differing opinions, and we don't give a fuck about
language issues (as you can see) - we just filter stupidity as much as we can. Call it censorship if you want,
but censoring out retards or trolls does not seem so bad to us.
There is not really a minimum of words or lines, but chances are, if it's too short and doesn't say anything,
it won't be accepted. You must describe the music (as accurately as possible! :p) and give arguments
to support your opinions!
Also, avoid referring to reviews of other members. This can be considered very rude, unless you point out a
previously made comparison that you agree with, or wish to elaborate on a point someone made before you. But
writing a review contradictory to a previous one just out of spite, or to boost or lower the average rating, is LAME.
While not as important for reviews as for the band and album submissions, we still ask a minimum of
writing ability. We're not so strict on this (hell, English isn't our first language,
and this whole page alone most likely has many grammar mistakes), and we certainly do not ask for sleek
professionalism; we just ask for the review to be readable. No abuse of typos, caps or punctuation
- or lack thereof - ("This album ROCKED!!!! BEST ALBUM EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!" or then "this album reallly
sucked i thought it was gay and teh giutar waspoor its overal prety weak") - just try to be coherent, and if
possible, helpful for the readers. Re-read your text before submitting it.
If English is not your first language, and your grasp of English is very crude, just avoid sending reviews altogether.
Sorry, this isn't a rag on anyone or their nationality, but that's just the way it is. Use proper punctuation too:
generally, one exclamation or question mark is sufficient. Ending every sentence that way is annoying to the reader.
Also there is a SPACE after the comma (,).
I shouldn't have to explain that... An inside joke, a quote or a small reference in another language than English is OK if it's not more than that (for example, finishing a Blind Guardian review with a brief sentence in German is fine), but the reviews must be available to any other visitor.
A no-brainer? Apparently not... Some albums are allowed to be listed more than once, depending on the nature of the re-release. But if you send the same review for both albums... we'll just reject both of them. If you managed to get past the moderators and we find out a duplicate review, we'll simply delete both reviews and take off your points.
In some very rare cases, track-by-track reviews could be appropriate. For albums with short numbers of tracks, this is not a problem. But generally speaking, these reviews are very lacking in content, poorly written, and reek of vapid amateurism. Please try to avoid them as much as possible.
Do not review the unfinished promo version of the album, like those with an incomplete tracklist or an unfinished production (rough mix etc.). Only review what is meant to be reviewed: either an official promo copy released by the band for this exact purpose, or the actual, final album.
Don't worry, we're not as harsh as you might think after reading this. We are very reasonable; we just don't want any garbage in the Encyclopaedia Metallum, and we just want to make sure no one spends a lot of time to send us stuff, and then whine that they wasted their time because their stuff wasn't accepted.