Jump to content

Talk:List of music considered the worst/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6→Archive 10

Sgt. Pepper (again)

why is this on here? the article says it is for "albums or songs that have been considered the worst music ever made by various combinations of music critics, television broadcasters (such as MTV), radio stations, composers, and public polls", yet its inclusion seems to be based on a dislike of a relatively small number of people: one poll (of an unknown size only open to a select number of groups) and four people. in fact the very first source for the section [1] contradicts its inclusion by noting "The album regularly tops all-time favourite lists..." and "Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band was recently ousted from number one in music author Colin Larkin's survey of fans and critics in his book, the Virgin All Time Top 1000 Albums", while the quoted Richard Smith uses the fact that the album "was often ranked by members of the music press as the best ever" as part of his argument that the album is at the least the most overrated album of all time. Billy Childish, also one of the people quoted, picked Sgt Pepper as the "supposedly great" album he'd never listen to again, but in order for the album to be considered "supposedly great" the general opinion of the album has to be that it's great (and if you go to the source, Childish states Sgt Pepper isn't even the worst Beatles album). if your own sources calling it one of the worst albums ever concede that most people like it, it shouldn't be included because the consensus is that it's not considered one of the worst. i'm sure if you do a google search on The Godfather or Citizen Kane you'd find people out there who think they're the most god awful movies ever made, but they wouldn't be included in Wikipedia's Worst Movie List because the people who like it far outnumber the people who hate it. 2600:1702:1701:1080:84C6:493B:1B57:F1A2 (talk) 09:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

The article also notes that Pepper is "often ranked by members of the music press as the best ever". The entry is balanced and well-supported. People seem to be having extreme difficulty with the idea that the Beatles can in fact be criticised. Micky Moats (talk) 17:03, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Criticise is one thing, naming it one of the worst albums ever made, is another. WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 17:34, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Browse through past discussions and the talk page archives, this has been discussed at length. If you feel strongly, you may want to write up an WP:RFC or something. Sergecross73 msg me 18:28, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

so the album that contains A DAY IN THE LIFE is the woest album ever made?are you fuckin' kidding me?this page is a waste of time written by'tards for other 'tards to agree with,but in a world where donald trump is the president i guess it makes perfect sense.what an awful joke.72.239.19.185 (talk) 18:00, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

This article does not list the worst music. It does not say Sgt. Pepper is the worst album ever made.
This article lists music which has been considered the worst. Sgt. Pepper has been considered the worst. - SummerPhDv2.0 18:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
by an extremely tiny handful of people, which is not noteworthy per WP:NPOV (WP:WEIGHT, WP:BALANCE, WP:SUBJECTIVE) 2600:1700:B280:B1C0:86A:1136:89F7:FECC (talk) 21:07, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Article's title

I recently changed the title to List of the worst popular music and this has now been reverted. The article is apparently only about popular music and "considered" is redundant. Rwood128 (talk) 15:10, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I reverted you. You should generally discuss before renaming articles, especially ones that are contentious and/or have a lot of debates of inclusion of entries. Alternate names often complicate that. Your change was not an improvement.
  1. Popular music isn’t particularly the scope of the article, it’s just how it’s played out so far. But as long as there isn’t any other sort of music articles to disambiguate from, it’s extraneous to add here.
  2. ”Considered” is definitely necessary to preserve the proper scope of the article. We cannot objectively state the content is the worst. And if we did, we’d want some sort of objective metric, like taking the lowest scoring entries from an aggregator system/website. Like taking the bottom ten entries off of Metacritic or something. But that is fundamentally not what this article documents. It documents instances of RS coverage where professional journalists or polls considered items of music “the worst”.
Number 1 is debatable, but number 2 is a hard no - it completely throws the entire article’s scope out of whack. Sergecross73 msg me 15:40, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Due to the continued disputes above about whether or not this list and the entries conform to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and because there seems to be no end to the issue in sight, the issue has been brought to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. The specific discussion can be found here: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#List of music considered the worst. 2600:1700:B280:B1C0:F9D8:738:A901:F251 (talk) 01:21, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Please dont WP:FORUMSHOP. One discussion at a time please. Sergecross73 msg me 01:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. This alone is proof that the article is not neutral. WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 01:49, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Read the title of the article. That unsourced sentence addition from last September fell outside of the scope of it. Sergecross73 msg me 02:02, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Sure, as you say. How dare somebody say something good about Pepper, even if it follows WP:NPOV. The scope of the article can remain, even if in a sentence it's mentioned that Pepper is considered a good album. Apparently you don't want people to know it. WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 02:06, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Stop casting WP:ASPERSIONS. If I wanted to trash Sgt Pepper, surely I’d have more than zero edits at its actual article. Also, if you did a closer look, you’d see I’ve trimmed similar content out of other entries, if you weren’t so busy cherry picking difs to try to create this ludicrous narrative of yours. Sergecross73 msg me 02:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
That doesn't prove anything. As long as you keep the album here and remove any mentioning of positive reception of the album, you've done your job. WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 03:03, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
What job? Sergecross73 msg me 03:11, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

RFC for Sgt. Pepper's inclusion

NO CONSENSUS
It's clear that some commenters here have been brought in by the notice on Reddit, but they are not all making the same recommendation and not all of those comments below are more like votes than reasoned arguments, and not all of those vote-like comments come from that source, so I don't see a need to invalidate the RfC on that ground.

Looking at those people who made reasoned arguments for or against the album's inclusion, the opinions almost all fall into two camps - this article is for "music that has been widely considered the worst, regardless of whether it has also been considered among the best" and "music that has been widely considered the worst and the balance of reviews is significantly negative". If the first is the case then there is a weak consensus in favour of inclusion (although there is disagreement whether it has been specifically called "the worst" or just very bad), but if the latter is true then Sgt. Pepper should not be included as everyone agrees that it is (also) widely considered among the best and so the balance would be at worst neutral. However, there is no consensus in this discussion about what the inclusion is, and there is nothing in the article that makes this clear, nor is there any evidence on this talk page or in its archives of a consensus having been reached on this quesiton - indeed rather the opposite is. Accordingly with no clear criteria against which to weigh the competing arguments, I have to consider them on their own merits, and neither is clearly stronger or better supported than the other. A no consensus closure is therefore the only one open to me.

I know this closure will not help resolve the years-long debate about the inclusion of this album, and many will find it unsatisfactory for that reason, but anything else would be a supervote and/or require me to determine the scope of the article - something that is very significantly beyond the authority of a single editor. Thryduulf (talk) 16:22, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The album Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, by the Beatles, is in this article. According to many Wikipedians, this album should not be included, since it is considered one of the best albums of all time; at the same time, other Wikipedians argue that this album has been named as one of the worst by some sources. Instead of reverting our edits again and again, I propose you answer the question:

"Should the album Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band be included in the article List of music considered the worst?"

With the answer Yes or No, accompanied by your reasons. WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 21:25, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Yes - While it is true that many sources consider it to be the best/one of the best albums of all time, this article is not "List of the worst music". This is "List of music considered the worst". The album meets the inclusion criteria for this article. - SummerPhDv2.0 00:15, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes - It’s positive reception does not negate that multiple reliable source consider it the worst, which is the article’s scope, just as being a commercial success (Nickelback, Vanilla Ice) doesn’t negate it either. This article’s scope is different than “worst ratings on Rotten Tomatoes” or “worst box office bombs” - it’s not a total or aggregate measure, but rather, a documentation of instances when something is considered the worst. Sergecross73 msg me 00:57, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
  • No - It is logically impossible for it to simultaneously be generally considered one of the best and one of the worst albums ever. the only way to do so is to state there is no criteria required for inclusion other than someone stating they hate it, which would make this article pointless and in need of deletion as every song and album ever recorded or written should be included because, if you look it up, you'll find someone out there who considers it one of the worst songs/album ever. people are allowed to criticize it, people are allowed to hate it, but one person one time saying something is the worst ever should not be the lone hurdle needed for inclusion, because it is not reflective of the general opinion. if 10 people think its the worst ever while 10,000 people think its the best ever, the consensus is that it is one of the best ever. they might not agree with the consensus, but that is the general opinion of it none the less, and to say their ten thumbs down is equal to everyone else's thumbs up is giving their opinion undue weight. yes this article has "considered" in the title, but so does the similar article List of films considered the worst, and you don't find The Godfather on there even though some people consider it the worst movie ever, because the number of people who think its good far outnumber the number of people who think its bad. yes Vanilla Ice and Nickelback were commercially successful, but past commercial success is not indicative of how people view it years removed from its popularity. Vanilla Ice and Nickelback regularly appear in all-time worst polls, Sgt. Pepper does not. it appeared in one poll that only a select group was allowed to vote in, with (unless someone actually has the magazine and can look it up) no indication of how many people participated nor by what percentage it won by. the lead in the article itself says polls like this are unreliable. most of the entries included in the article are there because they typically are viewed as being one of the worst songs/albums by the public at large, but this is not. it is being included because it is viewed as the worst by an extremely small number of people, which Wikipedia:WEIGHT discourages. Sgt. Pepper should be removed because its continued inclusion gives the false impression that it is viewed far more negatively by the public than it actually is. 108.199.123.95 (talk) 10:19, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment - It is entirely logical for one album to be considered one of the best and considered one of the worst albums ever. The album meets this article's inclusion criteria. Why is this album a special case? - SummerPhDv2.0 19:18, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Really? That's logical for you? Then I will find some sources that say that the Godfather is a bad movie and overrated, and include it in List of films considered the worst. By your logic, it's correct to do so. WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 20:09, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
WP:WEIGHT: "If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, it does not belong on Wikipedia, regardless of whether it is true or you can prove it, except perhaps in some ancillary article". if this was "List of controversial polls by Melody Maker" or "List of music Guardians critic Richard Smith hates", its inclusion would be warranted, but five people not liking something is not notable. their opinions do not supersede the rest of the world's. this is not, or rather should not, be a list of opinions, it should be a list of facts. "Sgt. Pepper is one of the greatest albums of all time" is an opinion; "Sgt. Pepper is widely viewed as being one of the greatest albums of all time" is a fact, because it can be supported by wide variety of sources from a large number of groups and individuals. even if its true five people don't like the album, "Sgt. Pepper is viewed by five people to be the worst album ever" is not a notable fact, and its continued inclusion, not exclusion, is making it a special case because, while most of the stuff on here is included because it is widely viewed as being one of the worst songs/albums ever, you are ignoring the fact that Sgt. Pepper is viewed as one of the greatest (the exact opposite of what this list is about) and include it anyway because a very tiny handful of people don't like it. what makes these select people so lauded their views trump the rest of the world? (EDIT: for the record i'm the ip user above, 108.199.123.95) 2600:1702:1701:1080:CD1C:C8F5:A24:BC60 (talk) 20:30, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes - Deemed one of the worst ever by a number of artists and writers, with reliable sourcing. Acclaim doesn't negate the fact there are people who really don't like it. Micky Moats (talk) 21:43, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
  • No - Just because something's considered overrated doesn't mean it's the worst. In fact, it topped Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums Of All Time list. It's a great album, is universally praised by critics, and is one of the most influential albums of all time. To consider this among the worst would ruin the validity of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.15.119 (talk) 12:24, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment - This article does not say it is the worst. It says it has been considered the worst. (Incidentally, it is not "universally" praised, as evidenced by even one critic not liking it.) - SummerPhDv2.0 19:14, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Sure, a few people consider it the worst. But there are far more people that consider it the best, something that can't be said about any other album on this list. Not to mention, you admitted that this is the band's highwater mark, so even you admit that many consider this album to be the best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.15.119 (talk) 14:10, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
The title of that thread is "Wikipedians are putting "Sgt. Pepper" in the article "List of music considered the worst". Please vote in this talk page if you feel they should/shouldn't." In no place it says to vote "No", it actually says to come and say something on the matter. WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 15:53, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
The thread is in "The Beatles". I rather doubt Beatles fans who are unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies and procedures are coming here to learn about inclusion criteria and logically assess whether or not their favorite band's highwater mark is considered the worst ever. - SummerPhDv2.0 19:12, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Good to know that you don't consider their opinions valid. Would you feel safer if the question is in the Music subreddit? WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 20:06, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Come on, do you really need an explanation as to how one of the biggest fanbase congregations on the internet are going to react to their favorite band being on a “worst of” list? I refuse to believe anyone is that naive that they don’t see the intended response here. It’s WP:CANVASSing in the spirit, if not the letter, of the rule. Sergecross73 msg me 20:16, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Apologies- I've stricken the offending bit. The fact that it is on a Beatles fan subreddit was what brought me to raise bias concerns. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 19:06, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  • No - Sgt Pepper's is considered one of the greatest albums of all time. The fact that we're even asking this question demonstrates the problem with this article. As I understand it, if there is at least one source that says something is the worse, it merits inclusion in the article, thus potentially treating a WP:FRINGE viewpoint as mainstream. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 15:21, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment - If there is a problem with this article, carving out an exception for this one album makes the article worse, not better. If the inclusion criteria or the existence of this article is a problem, this RfC isn't designed to address that. - SummerPhDv2.0 19:22, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I disagree. Removing an album that doesn't belong makes it better, not worse. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:06, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes per SummerPhD. The belief that Peppers has been considered the worst in some polls is well-documented. Ilovetopaint (talk) 23:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
  • No Firstly, I don't think 'list of music considered the worst (by at least four sources)' is encyclopedic. In some cases this criterion gives undue weight to the views of a very small minority of reviewers, given the massive number of sources evaluating certain pieces of music. I stumbled across this article expecting it to be synonymous with 'list of music notable for negative reception', and think perhaps a move to that title would be beneficial.

Secondly, the sources provided for Sgt. Pepper are in any case rather weak. Billy Childish does not state that he considers the album amongst the worst ever. Whereas most criticism in the article concerns music being of low quality and unpleasant to listen to, I interpret Bill Drummond's quote to be about the influence that the album had on music that was subsequently created; it's unclear whether he considers Sgt. Pepper amongst the worst music in the other sense. Richard Smith's article is a blog post, which seems less notable than an official Guardian review, and he stops short of clearly stating he considers Sgt. Pepper to be amongst the worst of all time. 91.84.66.228 (talk) 11:20, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Yes - I found this discussion via the plea on the Beatles' Reddit, as the other unregistered users clearly did (72.192.15.119 is obviously a big Beatles fan). I came here thinking that Sgt. Pepper was being subjected to baseless slander, however the sources seem quite reputable. On top of that, the lead section makes clear that the article isn't definitive, and even relies on humourous pieces. The album is enshrined as a classic, but clearly has its detractors and us fans should probably learn not to take criticism of the Fabs so seriously. 82.132.218.91 (talk) 11:37, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment - FWIW I came across this article after googling "list of bad ideas wikipedia". I went to the talk page expecting to see complaints about Sgt. Pepper appearing on this list (amongst a grand total of 15 albums), and that is what I found. Sgt. Pepper's detractors are given appropriate coverage in the main article on that album. If we're talking about humour and a judicious choice of material where it's difficult to include everything, surely people are more enthused to discover what they may see as obscure peculiarities (e.g. the Lou Reed and Bee Gees entries), than be told about some contrarian poll result (also featuring OK Computer plus 10 or more ordinary well-liked albums). It's the combination of this edit being both leaden, unencyclopedic _and_ vigorously defended by editors that annoyed me enough to comment in the RFC. Otherwise I couldn't care less how many people like or dislike this piece of music. 91.84.66.228 (talk) 21:12, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes - I’m a Beatles fan but familiar to suggestions of Pepper being vastly overrated with some of the worst songs the Beatles have written. Aside from “She’s Leaving Home” and “A Day in the Life”, the rest of the album is average at best and at worst, total shite. Just sayin’Noelrock (talk) 12:09, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes – As pointed out above it's not logically inconsistent for something to have been considered the best and worst of something at the same time. This situation is actually so common that there's even a word for it, depending on the timing of reactions, which is "backlash"—which seems to be the phenomenon documented in the sources in question. The fact that this backlash is contrary to the dominant narrative does not make it contrarian (in the sense of "playing devil's advocate" or expressing an insincere belief for the purpose of trolling). These critics and musicians are expressing a sincerely held belief that Sgt. Pepper's is actually terrible. Each of the sources is germane, they all are saying the album is "the worst" in a particular way. Attempts to interpret the sources otherwise are hair-splitting. For instance, the assertion that Drummond's comment could be read as a criticism of the album's cultural influence, rather the music itself, is—in addition to attempting to read Drummond's mind—merely pointing out another dimension of aesthetic judgment of music. By analogy, someone could say that C major is "the worst" key signature because of its overuse and banality; that person doesn't have to mean that C major is literally discordant or atonal on a musical level, because their comment is still recognizable as a sincere judgment that C major is "the worst". (I put aside any aside my personal aesthetic judgments about Sgt. Pepper's in these remarks, as everyone should be doing, but for full transparency: I love the Beatles, I enjoy Sgt. P's but I'd rank it a tier below Revolver, The Beatles, Abbey Road, probably Rubber Soul, maybe even Magical Mystery Tour depending which day of the week you ask me.) —BLZ · talk 18:19, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment. No one is denying there are individuals out there that sincerely hate Sgt Pepper, or that there are pockets of people out there who consider it to be the worst. what people are arguing is that a tiny handful of people considering something to be the worst is not notable, because everything is considered the worst by someone. this should be a list of songs/albums that are generally considered the "worst" because it is the view held by a significant number of people. 10 people calling something the worst is not notable; 100,000 people calling something the worst is. and if something is generally considered one of the best, it cannot also be generally considered one of the worst, because the majority opinion can only be on one side. even if the opinions were evenly split, they would cancel each other out and push for the album not to be included. if half the people like it and half the people hate it, the response would be "mixed" and not considered one of the "best" or "worst". but that is not the case here as far more people consider Sgt Pepper to be one of the best albums of all time than one of the worst (a fact most of the sources listed point out).
also scrutinizing sources is not splitting hairs, because not all of them belong, specifically (as pointed out by 91.84.66.228) Billy Childish. in that source [2], what exactly does he say? he says Sgt. Pepper is a "supposedly great album he'd gladly never listed to again". that's not the same as calling it one of the worst albums ever in the history of music ("Boyhood" is a supposedly great movie i'd gladly never watch again, but i don't consider it the worst movie ever made). he calls it "the worst Beatles album up to that point", which again is not the same as calling it one of the worst albums ever in the history of music. he then follows up his "worst up to that point" comment by stating "Live at the Star Club trounces it with ease", so he doesn't even consider Sgt Pepper to be the worst Beatles album of all time. if he doesn't even consider Sgt Pepper to be the worst Beatles album of all time, how can he consider Sgt Pepper to be the worst album of all time? he can't because he doesn't, and the source is being misconstrued to make it fit the article. as for Drummond, if his quote (which is somewhat vague) is open to interpretation, more information is needed from the source to give it some context. at least for Richard Smith and Childish reasons are given why they view it as overrated/something he would never listen to again. for Drummond, it seems its included simply because it had the words "Sgt Pepper" and "worst" in the same sentence. (this is ip 108.199.123.95) 108.199.123.95 (talk) 21:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment - Dissenting views are certainly worth noting on the article's main page. I just think that "considered the worst" implies extra criteria apart from four sources, or indeed one source plus three weaker supporting sources, offering that opinion. I.e., if there are more notable sources such as Rolling Stone with a diametrically opposed opinion, plus mostly or all very positive reviews in Wikipedia's infobox, "considered the worst" seems contrary to a normal understanding of that phrase. There is nothing to preclude an album dividing opinion so much that it is widely and notably considered both amongst the best and amongst the worst, but Sgt. Pepper is not such an album. There is a difference between sources being used to cite a fact--four sources is usually more than necessary--versus to support how representative a critical opinion may be. I note that the similar article on video games is titled "List of video games notable for negative reception", possibly to address this kind of problem. Also, the generous interpretation that is "has sources, period", implying a _long_ list including Sgt. Pepper, would be more defensible if more than 15 albums were listed. (Same user as 91.84.66.228 above). Glumblebee (talk) 15:00, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
  • No. (Answering my own question.) The albums listed in this article all have negative reception, and correctly appear in an article called "List of music considered the worst". Sgt. Pepper's, however, was noted to have received overwhelming praise. The fact that Sgt. Pepper's is in this list makes it appear as it had the same kind of reception.
Having Fun with Elvis on Stage
Review scores
SourceRating
AllMusic
MusicHound
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (soundtrack)
Review scores
SourceRating
AllMusic
Encyclopedia of Popular Music
The Rolling Stone Record Guide
The Village VoiceD+
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
Review scores
SourceRating
AllMusic
The A.V. ClubB+
The Daily Telegraph
Encyclopedia of Popular Music
MusicHound Rock5/5
Paste89/100
Pitchfork10/10
The Rolling Stone Album Guide
Sputnikmusic5/5
The Village VoiceA
For example, let's look at two albums of this article. First, Having Fun with Elvis on Stage, has the next reception box in its article page (seen at the right).
Another example, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (soundtrack):
Both albums are fairly listed in this page, then. Compare that to Sgt. Pepper's reception.
An album with that kind of reception is opposed to appear in an article called List of music considered the worst. It's against WP:BIAS and WP:WEIGHT. WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 17:57, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment I'm afraid using infoboxes to sway opinion is not going to change consensus here. Note that nine of ten of the "retrospective reviews" are, with exception to Christgau, printed post-1998. Just take a look at Stone Roses, perfect infobox, but a paragraph of scathing criticism by some well-respected contributors. We need to consider WP:MINORITY. It is well-known that contemporary critic Richard Goldstein was very scathing in his criticism of Pepper. And that was strongly supported by Lester Bangs in 1981. "As a near-lone voice of dissent, Goldstein was widely castigated for his views." It is only the writers who are willing to stick their neck out and hold to their principles of quality music who are going to give a true appraisal of a record. As Brett Anderson said to Melody Maker in 1997: "I completely lost respect for the music business. I began to see it in its true colours, a gang of sheep who were too afraid to contradict popular opinion." They say nobody is above the law. Likewise no artist is immune to severe criticism. Yup, even the Beatles.Noelrock (talk) 18:54, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment here's the problem with Richard Goldstein and WP:MINORITY: yes Richard Goldstein wrote a very scathing review of Sgt Pepper, yes he and his review of Sgt Pepper was and is extremely noteworthy, but at no point did he declare Sgt Pepper to be the worst album ever, which is the sole basis of this article and apparently the lone criteria needed for inclusion. as for MINORITY, remember WP:WEIGHT:
"If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents;
If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, it does not belong on Wikipedia, regardless of whether it is true or you can prove it, except perhaps in some ancillary article."
"People who didn't like Sgt Pepper" would be a significant minority, which is why not only is Goldstein's review covered in detail in the appropriate section of the Sgt Pepper's page, but reviews of his review are also covered. "People who think Sgt Pepper is the worst album ever" is an extremely small minority, and why it Sgt Pepper shouldn't be included in this list, because it gives the false impression the critical views of it are far more negative than they are, and thus this tiny group's opinion more weight than the rest of the world's. 108.199.123.95 (talk) 19:57, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment I observe that the Stone Roses' album does not however appear in the list we are discussing. Richard Goldstein says near the end of his review, "What a shame that “A Day in the Life” is only a coda to an otherwise undistinguished collection of work"--a far cry from calling Sgt. Pepper one of the worst albums ever. Regarding the Melody Maker poll, one interpretation is that the editors and voters were unusually willing to stick their necks out by naming a bunch of mostly well-received albums, but another is that they (or in particular the editors) were seeking attention and being provocative, as far as criticism of popular music permits. That's not unlikely for an entertainment magazine that suffered declining sales and was in its final years. Glumblebee (talk) 20:42, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment Very true. Yes, The Stone Roses does not appear in this list. The problem with Pepper, and the controversy which plagues it, is the fact that is it overrated. Because it is so vastly overrated, it unfortunately falls victim to being placed in a list of worst ever albums. If an album is so overrated in popular culture, then it cannot escape harsh criticism, even if that means calling it one of the worst albums of all time. Look, there are many albums that could also be added to this list, The Boy with the X-Ray Eyes by Babylon Zoo for example. How about Planet Jedward. There are many more I could add. The fact is Pepper, whether you like it or not, topped a Melody Maker poll of worst albums and also has a reputation as being a controversial topic among the rock establishment. The Stone Roses is overrated in my opinion, despite placing at no. 498 on Rolling Stones 500 Greatest Albums of All Time list. The problem with Pepper is that the same publication decided to place it at no. 1 despite it being mediocre compared to other great rock albums. Is that because the Oxford Encyclopedia of British Literature described it as "the most important and influential rock-and-roll album ever recorded." It's possible. The fact is though, 99.9% of the population couldn't care less about "importance" or "cultural significance". The average Joe who listens to a record, cares mostly about hooks. And it is hooks that Pepper fails to deliver.Noelrock (talk) 21:30, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment I agree that there are lots of other albums that could be added to this list, and if there were at least 50 albums mentioned then Sgt. Pepper's inclusion would be less annoying to me, because it would be less prominent and might be accompanied by other more-often celebrated works. You may be right that Sgt. Pepper appeals less to the average listener than some others that are considered amongst the best by critics. However on a similar note, what some of us are arguing is that "considered the worst (by a few approved critical voices, most notably one poll)" is not the sense in which the average Joe would interpret the comment, "Sgt. Pepper, isn't that considered one of the worst albums ever?" In the case of this non-technical subject I think the interpretation of average Joe is pertinent. I also agree that Sgt. Pepper would be more at home in a list of music considered overrated. Although critical interpretation of sources is not encouraged on Wikipedia, I like to think that most people can look at the Melody Maker poll and personally agree that, leaving aside Sgt. Pepper, they decided to pick on music that could be seen as either middle-of-the-road, overblown and overrated more so than especially tasteless, painful to listen to or incompetently written and performed. Their finding Pictures at an Exhibition by ELP--an example of pretentious and onanistic prog rock to some, but liked by most fans and not critically panned--to be worse than Love Beach by the same band, which is widely considered plain awful and disliked by the band themselves, is illustrative of that different sense of "worst albums". Glumblebee (talk) 22:26, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes - An album can be simultaneously praised and condemned. One side will weigh heavier than the other, of course, but the article isn't about that. If an album has been referred to as the worst by a combination of reliable sources, then it goes here. 2A02:C7F:8E93:DF00:857B:F747:3D05:225 (talk) 22:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Question/Comment Can anyone point to a list of worst music published by a reliable source where Sgt Pepper is listed? If Wikipedia is the only one who's listing Sgt Pepper, then is it a case of original research? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • No, this album absolutely does not belong here, per FRINGE. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 18:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • No. To all the people who voted yes to this, I got to ask, what the fuck is wrong with y'all? You guys know full well that the purpose of this article is to list albums/songs that are usually considered to be awful by the vast majority of both critics and audiences, not a small number of them. Cut this "well it's not called the 'list of the worst music'" BS! Seriously, because somebody happen to find enough sources to "justify" its entry (to the point where this album has a full-blown paragraph while every other entry has two or three sentences at most), we should just ignore the general consensus that Sgt. Pepper's is still the greatest album of all time. That is the stupid thing I ever heard. And to be honest, I can't help but feel like every single one of you that voted yes are not only largely motivated by your bias against this album than any sort of policy, I think all of you had a help in writing this! And for the record, I am not against this article; I think it's actually good we have lists of pieces of entertainment/art that are usually viewed as awful. But goddamn, I cannot think of better argument on why articles such as this will be better off being deleted than you guys' attitude of "Well, someone added a critically acclaimed album to this list, but because this entry has at least two sources from critics saying it's the worst thing they've ever heard, guess it has to stay!" Rjrya395 (talk) 02:57, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
OK. Looking this article's history, I can't help but be extremely annoyed that some anonymous user was able to put Sgt. Pepper's on this list, and because he happens to have two sources, you guys have been defending its inclusion ever since.Rjrya395 (talk) 03:19, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Are you new to RFC’s or something? Stop removing what is actively being discussed or you’re going to end up blocked. (You’re already close to WP:3RR.) Sergecross73 msg me 03:26, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Going offtopic
"Actively." That's a strange way to describe a discussion that's been dead for most of a month.
Look I am sorry that I'm being rude, but again, I can't help but be extremely annoyed that some anonymous user was able to put Sgt. Pepper's on this list, and because he happens to have two sources, you guys have been defending its inclusion ever since. And not only that, but some of you have actually help the entry grew!
And don't you tell me stop editing. You know full well that people are going to dispute having the number one album on the Rolling Stone 500 Greatest Albums of All Time be called the worst because in the 1990s some music critics got sick of all the praise it was getting. Rjrya395 (talk) 03:53, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
I’m talking about you. You just left a comment. And if you just left a comment, then I would think that you would realize that the discussion is objectively still active. And any editor is well within their right to tell you not to violate WP:3RR. And violating it is going to get your account blocked or get the page locked from editing, so calm yourself down. Sergecross73 msg me 14:39, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry I think it's bullshit that someone can just add a critically acclaimed album on this list (and I really find it odd it was an anonymous user), but because that edit has some sources, you, for no other reason other than some bureaucratic idiocy, have obstructively been trying to keep this on this list. Rjrya395 (talk) 16:54, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Strong feelings isn’t a valid reason to not follow the rules, and won’t protect you from being blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 17:32, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
So you're threatening to block me? Oh, I'm sure the Arbitration Committee will love to hear how Sgt. Pepper's managed to get on this list. Rjrya395 (talk) 18:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
...I don’t think you understand what ArbCom does or how it works... Sergecross73 msg me 18:09, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Maybe not. But I can't help but notice that you haven't reverse my edit yet. Rjrya395 (talk) 18:25, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Because I’m practicing what I preach - following the rules. That includes reverting once and discussing. Besides, this has been a long running debate with a lot of participants. It’s not like no one is going to notice what you did, especially with you making such a big scene. Someone will add it back in, and if you keep removing it without a consensus, you’ll be blocked for violating WP:3RR. Imagine someone going into a restaurant and going around yelling and pushing people because you feel strongly that the food is bad. You can do it for a bit, but not all night long, bsooner or later, right or wrong, you’re going to make enough of a scene that you get kicked out, whether the food was bad or not, because you’re not handling things the right way. That’s more or less what you’re doing here. Sergecross73 msg me 18:44, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
That is a terrible analogy. Admit it, you know full well that the rationale justifying Sgt. Pepper's presence on this list is flawed as all hell. Rjrya395 (talk) 19:12, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
As I’ve already requested, assume good faith. If you’re incapable of understanding an opposing argument, that’s fine, but you’ve got to stop it with the bad-faith assumptions and this “telling people what they know” garbage. You’ve honestly probably said all you need to say. Unless you’re going to strengthen your argument, you’ve made your stance clear. All you really need to do is wait and see how the discussion is closed. Sergecross73 msg me 19:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
You have also made it clear that you are clearly in favor of keeping Sgt. Pepper's on this list. Don't act like you're going to be fair. Rjrya395 (talk) 19:49, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
”Fair” on what? Yes, I took a stance, as is the point of an RFC. But I have easily maintained good-faith, and will not be the one who will make the final call on closing the discussion or judging a consensus, so I have no idea what you’re driving at here... Sergecross73 msg me 19:55, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
So are we going to reach a consensus here, because it feels like this is nothing more than an excuse to discourage anyone from wanting to delete the Sgt. Pepper entry. Rjrya395 (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Comment It seems an anonymous IP has left some WP:PERSONALATTACKS on the talk pages of users who edited this page. See [3], [4], [5]. These were posted shortly after Rjrya395 posted here. I assume it is just a coincidence and nothing to do with Rjrya395. But this tone highlights some of the bloody-mindedness of the people who have an agenda here. RFC is closed. Move on people.Noelrock (talk) 14:19, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
No, I'm not moving on. Especially because you have made it quite clear that you think your hatred towards album justify Sgt. Pepper's being on this list. Rjrya395 (talk) 16:54, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
OK, I get your concerns. But try toning down the language a little. A user had a concern about the album being on the list. I felt the need to bolster the section with some dissenting critics such as Goldstein, Bangs, Derogatis, Hilburn, Goldman etc. The Sgt. Pepper wiki only includes views from Goldstein and Bangs. So its worth considering the viewpoints of these respected critics. And don't assume that I have some hatred just because I found some reliable sources from New York Times, LA Times and added them to the list. I've also added some cites to bolster GNR's Chinese Democracy as a user also had a concern about its inclusion. Remember, as SummerPhDv2.0 said: "this article is not 'List of the worst music'. This is 'List of music considered the worst'."Noelrock (talk) 17:38, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
...Really? Because the title of this article is "List of music considered the worst", anyone can just waltz in and add any album they hate, even when the general consensus among most music critics is that that album is actually one of the greatest album ever made, and as long as that entry is properly sourced it gets to stay? Do you not see the problem with your logic? Rjrya395 (talk) 18:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
No. This entire article is the worst I have ever read, but the inclusion of Sgt. Pepper is one of the major nails in the coffin. If you include Sgt. Pepper, you will be able to include virtually every album and song in existence.--IndyNotes (talk) 17:53, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Comment - Are we actually still doing this RFC? Thing should have been thrown out once it became obvious that someone from here had hit the internet asking Beatles fans for help. I doubt the plea on Reddit is the only one. Micky Moats (talk) 18:31, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
See WP:RFCCLOSE. And yes, I assume these recent comments are almost certainly WP:CANVASSed editors as well. The discussion was unlisted weeks ago. There’s no longer anything alerting editors to the discussion, yet these not-that-active accounts that have never edited the articles still managed to find the discussion and !vote “no”? It’s almost certainly more poorly coordinated canvassing. Sergecross73 msg me 02:30, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, it's an extensive section with supporting refs, and its a service to the reader to include it. Some reasonable percentage of readers interested in this subject generally will be enlightened by reading that section (if they want; or they can skip it if they want). It is true that the detractors are mostly engaging in cultural politics, in hyperbole in reaction to the stultifying worship of the Beatles and this album particularly, which is reasonably held to have been retarded future musical progress to a a degree; nobody really thinks that Sgt Peppers is one of the worst albums ever in the sense of the instruments being out of tune and the songwriters being inept and so forth.
But so? There's lots of ways to be bad, and having a doleful cultural effect is one of them. It's not really up to us to be gatekeepers of in what way an album is considered to be really terrible. Let the reader decide. She doesn't have to agree with anyone's assessment of Sgt Pepper if she doesn't want to. But don't let's hide the info from the reader.
I'd be OK with adding short para at the end to to the effect of "However, well-regarded critics such as Tom, Dick, and Harry have praised the album...". That'd be appropriate. Since it is kind of a special case, putting it in its own section would be maybe good. It's a different case than The Shaggs and so on, so having it come up first is a bit offputting. Herostratus (talk) 08:12, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes The sources make it clear that well-respected, high profile music journalists and publications have explicitly named it as such. Melody Maker is not an obscure blog or something. --Jayron32 13:34, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • No. Let's employ a little common sense here, shall we? The positive reception for Sgt. Pepper's is overwhelmingly higher than negative reviews, let alone people who consider it "one of the worst" albums. The album's inclusion on this page is perhaps the biggest violation of WP:UNDUE that I've ever seen: when the last majority of music reviewers/historians/experts/etc praise an album, but you include it on this list because a very small handful of people feel it's "the worst," you're giving way too much undue weight to that small minority. The entire basis for including it seems to be that there are a few reliable sources saying it's the "worst", which is silly; you will always find someone somewhere who says that something widely beloved is "the worst", but that doesn't mean we need to give undue weight to those people just because it's an WP:RS. When the album ranked at #1 on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums of All-Time ends up on a list of "music considered the worst", there is absolutely no way this article will be taken seriously by most Wikipedia readers... — Hunter Kahn 20:18, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
    • Comment It appears this discussion has been going on for a while and it does not seem to be leading to a resolution; opinions are obviously mixed and I see there have been accusations of sock puppetry. Perhaps this needs to be taken to WP:DNR? — Hunter Kahn 20:45, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Do you mean WP:DRN (Dispute resolution noticeboard)? "DNR" leads to Wikipedia:Deny recognition, which deals with trolls and vandalism. 2600:1700:B280:B1C0:F9D8:738:A901:F251 (talk) 01:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • No I'm a regular editor over at the List of films considered the worst article and I see that article is used as an example several times in this RfC. Some films with high Rotten Tomato scores have ended up on that list but the entries have an established history as being considered the worst by a number of high quality reliable sources in spite of their divisive status (1980's Heaven's Gate is a good example). Films such as Twilight (2008 film) and Darren Aronofsky's Mother! have been removed in spite of some sources calling them the worst ever made because those sources represent a WP:FRINGE viewpoint. The entry for Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band on this article fails to demonstrate that the album is widely considered one of the worst ever made. Two sources (the 1998 Melody Maker and Bill Drummond) call it the worst. The rest of the bulky paragraph includes quotes from a range of sources which call it overrated; labelling something overrated is totally different than calling something the worst ever made. The subject of this article is "worst music", not overrated music. The album's immense critical acclaim makes it a violation of WP:FRINGE to include the album on this list based on two outlier sources.LM2000 (talk) 02:21, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • No—someone needs to be trouted for even trying to include it. Unencyclopaedic pushing of a fringe minority POV. The fact that someone, somewhere has called it the "worst" is insufficient evidence for its inclusion. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 03:09, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sgt Pepper's? Really?

Why would Sgt Pepper's be added to the list? The negative reviews are overshadowed by the positive of the album. If we're going by this case we may as well add Thriller, Dark Side of the Moon and Led Zeppelin IV. Sgt Pepper's should be removed from this list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:387D:3F00:4504:893E:6885:5B7F (talk) 23:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

The article is not “music with a general consensus that it was overall bad”. It’s music “considered the worst”. Are there sources that call it the worst or not? Sergecross73 msg me 23:32, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

I completely agree. Everything is considered "the worst" by somebody. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.49.11.210 (talk) 21:37, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

You're arguing for the deletion of this article, then. For now, Sgt. Pepper is a well-referenced addition to it. 2A02:C7F:8EA3:B00:F13B:CC0A:96DE:F504 (talk) 22:23, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. But Wikipedia generally just covers what reliable sources cover. So we’re only covering professional writers/journalists or polls conducted by reliable sources. So that cuts down on the scope some. Sergecross73 msg me 23:36, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Yep, this article ought to be deleted. I can honestly say that this is the worst Wikipedia article I've ever read.--IndyNotes (talk) 17:52, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm a novice to Wikipedia (and I don't claim to be an expert at this site), but the inclusion of Sgt. Pepper's makes no sense. That a handful of writers and commentators view the album negatively doesn't mean it has a general reputation for being viewed negatively. This article is meant to speak to general reputation and critical consensus, not fringe opinion. This is probably one of the most absurd, outrageous additions I've ever seen on a Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1c2:4c01:4cbb:80f0:4e18:19e9:3b2b (talk) 03:48, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_music_considered_the_worst/Archive_4&oldid=1142768369"