Talk:Dungeons & Dragons (album)

message: Here's more info on the other D&D soundtracks. So, technically, the Midnight Syndicate soundtrack isn't the "first" officially licensed soundtrack for D&D.
Craig Stuart Garfinkle composed the first soundtrack for Dungeons & Dragons (when TSR owned the francise). His album, entitled Songs of the Dragon was sold independently by the artist and by TSR as a D&D accessory, with the artist retaining all rights to his music yet providing TSR (subsequently Wizards of the Coast, and now Hasbro) the master and synchronization rights. Garfinkle also scored music for the D&D video game Forgotten Realms: Baldur's Gate -  Dark Alliance II(2004)
Justin Burnett scored the official D&D soundtrack, entitled Dungeons & Dragons" (2000) for the movie.
In addition, several other musicians scored soundtracks for Dungeons & Dragons moviesand the television series in 1992 and 1993 Ebonyskye 03:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source other than the artist claiming that the first one is an official soundtrack for the game? J Milburn 03:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I meant third party claims, or something official from WotC, TSR or Hasbro? J Milburn 11:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

text: It's not the Midnight Syndicate website you are arguing with, it is the WotC website. Please take a read of this. J Milburn 21:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and IMDB is not reliable. Realise also that I am not talking about the various video games here, I am talking about soundtracks to the pen and paper role-playing game. J Milburn 21:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Say hello to policy. J Milburn 11:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

text: You evidently are not reading policy, or reading my sources. IMDB is NOT a reliable source, and the source I am relying on for that comment is not a Midnight Syndicate press release, but a quote from one of the people in charge of the issue at the WotC end, and, I'm sorry, but I think the people at WotC are qualified to know about the history of Dungeons & Dragons. The WotC website does not publish press releases- it isn't a music news site. It releases information relevant to it's customers- people who play it's role-playing games, such as myself. You are proposing that WotC actually doesn't know about the history of Dungeons & Dragons, and the people who do are some down and out eighties music artist, and some anonymous editor over at IMDB. Is this not what you are saying? J Milburn 10:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Right, well, this source is rather valuable, but alarm bells are ringing with the explanation that- "The music was born out of Dungeons and Dragons rich history and excellent product, but there is no formal relationship between our CD, "Songs of the Dragon" and TSR Inc., Wizards of the Coast Inc., or Hasbro Inc.. This is simply one of those rare occasions where an artist was able to protect the rights to his creation and now technology is allowing him to share it with the world." from here. However, I will work something in to the article. J Milburn 12:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just occurred to me that the Filmtrax album is actually nothing to do with the Garfinkle album. J Milburn 12:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have modified the article significantly, on the subject of it being the first soundtrack and on other subjects. However, I am still lacking a decent source for the Garfinkle album, and so I have omitted any mention of that. I am still actively working on the article, so I may come across one shortly. J Milburn 13:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks! 68.57.233.34 (talk) 03:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Previous official soundtracks for D&D 

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
#It is stable.
#:
#It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
#Overall: 
#:a Pass/Fail: 
Overall I think that you've done an excellent job with the article. There are, however, a few minor things that I feel need to be corrected before I can pass the article.
#The lead needs to be referenced, even if the facts and details from the lead are later repeated and expanded upon in the article itself.
#: See below. J Milburn 22:00, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, per WP:LEAD: Because leads are usually written at a greater level of generality than the body, lead information on non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source; there is not, however, a citation exception specific to leads. So it is up to one's interpretation I suppose. My question is, what harm does it do to cite in the lead? I could accept hearing that a lead COULD be fine without sources, but SHOULD not have sources is a bit iffy to me. Cheers, CP 18:01, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with andreasegde- anything in the lead, should, by the very nature of the lead, be mentioned elsewhere in the article, and so that the lead flows a little better, there should be no citations, meaning things should be cited elsewhere in the article. The only things that needed to be cited in leads is negative material in a BLP, or direct quotes, and I don't think either apply here. Or, that is what I have always thought, and what the relevent policy section said until a few days ago, but someone seems to have had a hack at it and added a tag saying that those things are debated. I will have to wade into THAT debate at some point... Anyway, thanks for the review, I will look into your requests. J Milburn 20:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha, so there's a debate about it then! Well my concern is following the policy, not debating on whether or not it's valid. I've left a quick note here so that other GA reviewers can have their say on the issue as it applies to good articles. I'm not trying to force anyone to reference the lead, by the way, just covering my own ass for when I plan to pass this. ;) Cheers, CP 22:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently, according to the discussion, a GA can have a lead without citations, so please consider my first GA comment stricken. Cheers, CP 01:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I'll see what I can do about the other points later this evening. J Milburn 16:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, and another thing- any advice on getting this up to featured article would be appreciated. It is longer than, and is about as well referenced as, some other album featured articles. J Milburn 21:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I've never done FA reviewing before, but when I read over the article again after you'd addressed my last point, I can go over it and offer any points that I can, although I would suggest you take it someone more experienced. A peer review COULD definitely help, except that I've found the general peer review system to be very useless unless it's a high priority topic. If one of the Wikiprojects has a good reputation for going over peer reviews, you might want to bring it to them specifically. I've had three peer reviews - List of Married... with Children episodes, Wade Mainer and Major League Baseball (video game). Of those, the first was more or less useless, and foolishly led me to believe that it was good enough for FL and the second garnered zero response from WP:BIO despite me having performed a review of someone else's bio. I brought the third to WP:Video Games, however, and got excellent advice and suggestions. So the best advice I can give is look around and see if any of the wikiprojects that this falls under gives particularly good reviews/advice and submit it there. Not only will they have a better understanding of what makes an article of their class good than I would, but they'll likely be able to compare you to other FAs in their class and give you better pointers. Cheers, CP 22:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I already lobbed this peer review's way, but, as you can see at the top of the talk page, I got nothing. WikiProject Metal is excellent for peer reviews, but, sadly, this isn't metal. I could post a request on WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons for advice... I guess dropping LuciferMorgan a line would be a good idea- he has written a lot of featured articles on albums, and reviewed many articles in his time. Anyway, thanks in advance for that, and I will hopefully add the final requested point to this article later tonight. J Milburn 15:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Right, everything look good, just one last little thing. The Gothic horror link in the lead and in musical style leads to a re-direct page that redirects to Gothic fiction. Is this what you intended? If so, you should by pass the redirect in the pipe. I would do it myself, but I wanted to make sure that that was your intention. Otherwise, it looks great and once this little question has been addressed, I will be happy to upgrade it to GA! Cheers, CP 20:04, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's what I intended. From what I know about the band, the music is much closer to gothic fiction than, say, gothic rock, and I think that is what Douglas means. The convention is not to 'fix' redirects with pipe links to the target article. Anyway, thanks a lot, you've been a fantastic reviewer, the article has certainly improved with your input. One last thing to ask- I know you said you aren't much experienced with Featured Articles, but you've certainly helped the article so far- how far do you think this is from Featured Article, and what do you think I could do to improve it? J Milburn 20:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Errr... not sure that's what I meant with the redirect thing, but as long as it's pointing to the right place, that's good enough for me. Let me pass the GA article, then think about FA status. Oh, and congratulations! Cheers, CP 20:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Thinking about it, I apologize but I'd really rather offer no advice than bad advice. I saw from above that the peer review didn't help at all, the best thing I can suggest is to look here at the list of FA Class Albums and see what you can take from them. The thing with FAs is that it's very difficult to get something that's not big and out there to FA because there are often too few reviews/third party sources to bring it up to that status. Having said that, it's certainly not impossible, so I say make use of all the resources that you can - look at past reviews for failed and current FAs, look at other FA Albums and, if you can take a bit of a pride hit, perhaps nominate it for an A Class review or even a FA Nomination - it may not pass, but the reviewers are excellent scrutinizers, so you may get some good tips, even if it passes. List of Married... with Children episodes will almost certainly fail, but I will at least get good tips from the reviewers who scrutinize the nomination. Best of luck and Cheers, CP 21:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Review 

message: The use of captionings such as "Compared to the opening of Conan the Barbarian" and "Described as sounding similar to Danny Elfman's music" next to the titles of the tracks themselves is highly irregular for a wikipedia music article and jars significantly with the standard expected for such an article. Perhaps these "observances" should be taken to a separate section before the track listing (properly cited, of course), allowing those who are interested in such information to find information in one way, and those interesting in solely the track listing to find information in the track listing, as expected?
It sounds needlessly pedantic, but thinking about it, including information about the tracks within the names of the tracks themselves is entirely inappropriate and not an efficient use of space in any way. It's confusing, allows the fan to rule over the artist (through exposing the influences of music at exactly the same level as the music itself), and not in any way part of a NPOV by putting one interpretation of the music above all others.
I won't change anything without response regarding this (I lack the technical know-how to do so in any case) as there could be a perfectly reasonable answer for this. As it stands, though, this section appears to be highly subjective, running against the prevailing structural standards of wikipedia, and entirely contrary to the purpose of the site. Any thoughts? 86.16.152.103 (talk) 01:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The notes are all attributed to the appropriate reviewer, and I believe that notes about the individual songs are relevant. They wouldn't really fit in anywhere else- where better to make notes about individual songs than with the songs themselves? When I originally placed it in the article, I used a table where the notes were not formatted in the same way. I personally thought that method a little better, but it was standardised. I would have no opposition to moving back to the original formatting. J Milburn (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I know this is an eleven year old conversation, and I don't know if anyone else is watching this, but I absolutely must agree with the IP. These critical commentaries belong in a reception section, but the track listing. oknazevad (talk) 14:50, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: J Milburn was the one who busted out all the hard work on this article back in the day, so hopefully he would be willing to take another look at your concerns. :) BOZ (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the comments. This was written in the wild west days of Wikipedia; it's no wonder some things don't hold up today! I was heartened that people were happy with the article when it ran on the main page. I've integrated the comments elsewhere, as recommended. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:16, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good! oknazevad (talk) 21:49, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

text: Good deal. :) BOZ (talk) 22:48, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate use of opinion captioning on the track listings themselves? 

message: I'd like to call for the sentence 'It is reputedly the only official Dungeons & Dragons soundtrack.' to be removed from the article. Even if it isn't accepted that the other claim of a previous 'official D&D soundtrack' existed, there is another CD called Dragonlance: Dragons of Autumn Twilight.
Dragonlance is a Dungeons and Dragons campaign setting, so the soundtrack of the Dragonlance: Dragons of Autumn Twilight movie is just as 'official' as this one, and that makes the claim that this CD is the only 'official' one seem to be an inaccurate statement.
I think it would be better to drop all references to claims like that and concentrate on the article being about the music and the project behind it. I think that we also need a Dragonlance: Dragons of Autumn Twilight (album) article and maybe a category for D&D music articles to go into. Big Mac (talk) 02:25, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be the soundtrack to a film, rather than specifically to the game. I don't really like the idea of claiming that both the primary and the secondary sources are wrong; that feels a little too much like original research. A note about that music, however, may be in order. J Milburn (talk) 11:30, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragonlance: Dragons of Autumn Twilight  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dungeons & Dragons (album). 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/20070629040456/http://www.midnightsyndicate.com:80/themusic.htm to http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/themusic.htm
*Added  tag to http://music.aol.com/artist/midnight-syndicate/370952/album/dungeons-and-dragons/659288
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070827073708/http://www.midnightsyndicate.com:80/dd.htm to http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/dd.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080609065913/http://www.clevescene.com:80/2005-05-25/news/scream-kings/print to http://www.clevescene.com/2005-05-25/news/scream-kings/print
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927045944/http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/movementmagazinems1006.htm to http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/movementmagazinems1006.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927050002/http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/paragonintvwms1006.htm to http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/paragonintvwms1006.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927050027/http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/livingdeadgirlsms1006.htm to http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/livingdeadgirlsms1006.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071008093007/http://www.nggnet.com/games/rpgs/ArticlesReviews/MSdungeonsanddragonscd.htm to http://www.nggnet.com/games/rpgs/ArticlesReviews/MSdungeonsanddragonscd.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070629154200/http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/main.htm to http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/main.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927045937/http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/dttbms1006.htm to http://www.midnightsyndicate.com/dttbms1006.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:36, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dungeons & Dragons (album). 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/20070816233841/http://www.uttertrash.net/midnightsyndicate.htm to http://www.uttertrash.net/midnightsyndicate.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:34, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Wow, a decade between achieving FA status and becoming "Today's Featured Article". It's got to be some sort of record. But congratulations to the editors. Praemonitus (talk) 14:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think J Milburn was the main person involved! BOZ (talk) 14:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! This was my first featured article; I confess that it's probably up to the standards expected at FAC in 2018, but I think it holds up fairly well. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:29, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Today's Featured Article 

message: There's an ongoing FA sweeps focused on the older ones to make sure everything is up to current standards.  I'm not entirely familiar with D&D related sources, but I'm really unsure that some of these sources meet the "high-quality reliable sources" part of WP:FACR.  Sources such as Legion of the Night, The Acaeum, Gamingreport.com, Living Dead Girls, Middle Pillar, Darker than the Bat, and Skirmisher Game Store would likely be challenged at a FAC today.  Most of the rest of the sources are primary. Hog Farm  Talk 20:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: User:J Milburn, do you have any insight on these? BOZ (talk) 23:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Legion of the Night is also primary. GamingReport is borderline. Living Dead Girls, Legion of the Bat, and Middle Pillar are the sort of alternative music ezines that there were loads of at the time -- some would pass as reliable, some not. I don't know how reliable The Acaeum would be, but at least one of the sources to it is to a scan of something that is reliable (but primary). Skirmisher Game Store could go. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:43, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing comments