# Talk:Motion City Soundtrack

Classifying MCS as Emo is completely incorrect. Their musical style does not resemble emo in the slightest. Tag should be removed--24.128.29.59 (talk) 04:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It is only the Wikiproject? Nothing to concern your casual reader. I agree with you, but they do in some form, belong in that 'scene'. An explanation was placed on my talk page at the time of its placement, read it here. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 04:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Most of those Former members were never in MCS. They provided things like backing vocals on the last record. They should be removed. Itsrainingfruit (talk) 19:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

What? Provided vocals for Even if it Kills Me when they had all left the band by 2002? They were all from before the band released I Am the Movie. This don't need further verification though. Kiac (talk) 02:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

The second sentence of the opening paragraph states "Only two of the founding members are still a part of the lineup."  While technically this is true, it seems kind of unneccessary to phrase it this way.  This sentence would make sense in an article about a band that frequently changes its lineup, but MCS is not like that: they have had the same lineup since 2002, (their debut album being released in 2003).  I think this should be changed to something along the lines of "The band consists of founding members Justin Pierre (lead vocals and guitar) and Joshua Cain (lead guitar and backing vocals), along with keyboardist and moog synthesist Jesse Johnson, bassist and backing vocalist Matthew Taylor, and drummer, percussionist and backing vocalist Tony Thaxton."  That way, it accurately says that only two founding members remain, but not in a way that portrays the band as frequently changing its lineup. -xCaMRocKx- (talk) 07:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Motion City Soundtrack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081014063157/http://www.modern-radio.com/mcs.html to http://www.modern-radio.com/mcs.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071025063125/http://www.noizemakesenemies.co.uk:80/2007/10/motion-city-soundtrack-interview.html to http://www.noizemakesenemies.co.uk/2007/10/motion-city-soundtrack-interview.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071220102200/http://dailycardinal.com/article/416 to http://www.dailycardinal.com/article/416
Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081010172937/http://livedaily.com/news/8565.html to http://www.livedaily.com/news/8565.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:15, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Is it really necessarily for it to be six(!!) inline citations to different reference sources in the infobox rgarding to what genre they're playing? // Psemmler (talk) 04:18, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Motion City Soundtrack/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Kees08 (talk · contribs) 17:17, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Starting the nomination, will begin review today.
Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 
First paragraph of Breakthrough and success (2003–06) needs a hefty rewrite. Some sentences are really bad (followed by the Warped Tour 2003).
The entire article needs a thorough copy-edit.
Performed complete copy-edit. Please double check my work if you have the time. Kees08 (talk) 02:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 
Lead section 
Expand lead section so it is three to four paragraphs.
Beg to differ, my article on Fall Out Boy was only two and it was just fine. Also see New Model Army, The Chariot and BFMV. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  13:47, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Counterpoint: I counted the number of characters in the intro vs the rest of the ratio, and created a ratio. Results:
FOB Ratio: 18.5
NMA Ratio: 8.1
BFMV Ratio: 8.4
The Chariot Ratio: 9.5
MCS Ratio: 16.0
Ratio was taken by dividing # of characters in body of article by the # of characters in the title.
Conclusion: MCS intro needs to be expanded. FOB was a bit of an anomalous datapoint because it was twice as big as the next closest (MCS). I could go into it more, but I think this should be sufficient proof. Let me know if you want to further discuss, thanks! Kees08 (talk) 04:00, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Kees08, the GA criteria state that the article should follow the MOS lead guidelines; part of that page, WP:LEADLENGTH gives the standards for numbers of paragraphs in an article. This article has 20474 prose characters—the guideline is based on prose characters—and for articles of between 15k and 30k prose characters, the guideline is for "two or three paragraphs". The rest of the page gives guidance on what should be included and at what level of detail, so if you feel there are particular sections of the article that should be represented in the lead that aren't (or are but need a bit more representation), by all means request it. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Layout 
Layout style is similar to other GA for bands.
Words to watch 
Several instances of this, weasel words, clarification needed, specific timeframes. They are all tagged in the article.
Fiction 
N/A
List incorporation 
Lists reflect style of other GAs for bands.
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 
The article is well cited.
B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines: 
Added a couple of citation needed tags. Please address.
Other than that, sources were reputable, and overall the article is well sourced.
C. It contains no original research: 
No original research is contained in this article.
D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 
Copyright Vio Detector found nothing significant, I did not either.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 
The article stays within scope.
B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 
The article stays focused on the topic.
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 
The article is neutral and without editorial bias.
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 
Mostly stable, only issue is folks changing the wording such that the band is no longer together when they are on tour. Full disclosure, I have been reverting those edits until they are officially not on tour. I don't think that is a big enough issue not to pass the article, but if an independent reviewer disagrees, just let me know.
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 
All are tagged with either own work or Flickr licenses.
B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 
All images have appropriate captions (succinct and descriptive).
Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
General comment: article needs an extensive copyedit, there were some pretty clear grammar issues that stuck out right away (like two periods in a row, or a sentence fragment with no capital letter to start).
@DannyMusicEditor: @Yeepsi: @Saginaw-hitchhiker:
Hey guys, where are we at on this? I don't think it would be too much work to get it to GA status, but if it doesn't start moving I'll have to close the nomination. Let me know what the plan is, thanks! I can help make edits if needed. Kees08 (talk) 14:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Uh, I think you might've mistagged me and Danny – we (along with Saginaw) were working on California (Blink-182 album) as a team nom, not MCS. Yeepsi (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
@Yeepsi: Sorry, I know (think?) you dig this music so I just was seeing if you were interested in helping. No worries! Kees08 (talk) 03:24, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
He's right about me tho. I did do a few things here, but not a lot. Ask Saginaw about this. I honestly don't have the time to expand the lead, and there are other things in here that I think I could fix but I have other things I'm working on right now, as I've got something at FLC at the moment. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  16:31, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good, I'll see what Saginaw says and we'll go from there. Thanks! Kees08 (talk) 03:24, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Kees08, it's been over three weeks since your last post, and no significant edits have been made to the article. The review is now at the point that it should either be closed—it can always be renominated once the issues raised have been addressed—or a final deadline for progress be set. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:00, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Agreed. Sorry, I was prepping for a trip and am just now getting back into this. I'll look at this now and see if we are close enough. Otherwise I will close it.Kees08 (talk) 03:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Read the rationale for the lead section, looks good to me. I'm going to give this one week for the remaining items (will try to work on it as well) before I close the nomination. Kees08 (talk) 06:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
@DannyMusicEditor: @Saginaw-hitchhiker:
Home stretch! Lead section is fine, I was wrong before. Performed a copy edit. Last things needed are a couple of citations and clarifications (all tagged in article). There is one thing in addition to that. In the plot, there is a bar for studio albums. That is not used at all. It should either be incorporated into the chart, or removed from the legend, I don't care which. Kees08 (talk) 02:56, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
hey guys, thanks so much for the help! i haven't been present as much recently. great to see this passed. thanks to you both for your hard work. @DannyMusicEditor: @Kees08: Saginaw-hitchhiker (talk) 02:33, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Of course, no problem. Look forward to doing more GA music reviews, have a couple I am eyeing now. Kees08 (talk) 06:06, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Motion City Soundtrack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://ec.libsyn.com/p/4/0/0/4005c806b8ff4410/VV025.mp3?d13a76d516d9dec20c3d276ce028ed5089ab1ce3dae902ea1d06ca8634d4cc5d4645&c_id=8177547
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.spin.com/articles/qa-motion-city-soundtrack-talk-experimental-lp/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theaquarian.com/2011/09/01/interview-with-matt-taylor-from-motion-city-soundtrack-everything-is-better-than-ever/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bostonmusicspotlight.com/features-motion-city-soundtrack-interview-with-bassist-matthew-taylor-september-2011/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-06-27/entertainment/bs-ae-music-story-0629-20120625_1_motion-city-soundtrack-pierre-ed-ackerson
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080117183228/http://media.www.newsrecord.org/media/storage/paper693/news/2004/11/15/ArtsEntertainment/Motion.City.Soundtrack.Boards.A.PopPunk.Train-804328.shtml to http://media.www.newsrecord.org/media/storage/paper693/news/2004/11/15/ArtsEntertainment/Motion.City.Soundtrack.Boards.A.PopPunk.Train-804328.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:04, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Motion City Soundtrack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303231748/http://www4.vindy.com/content/entertainment/290465242755743.php to http://www4.vindy.com/content/entertainment/290465242755743.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:51, 6 February 2018 (UTC)