Judas Priest for Prog Related!

SouthSideoftheSky wrote: It seems to me that a substantial number of special collaborators support the inclusion of Judas Priest into Prog Related. This ought to resonate with the admin team.   I don't wish to push an issue beyond what is reasonable, but as I've said before it's been more than three years since they were evaluated and rejected so maybe they deserve another chance given the support they seem to have here?  What is needed is that a special collaborator takes the suggestion to the admin team and ask for a re-evaluation based on the considerations raised in this thread.

rogerthat wrote: Andyman1125 wrote: Isn't it enough to say that they were rejected?  Highly recommended if you'd much rather people didn't participate in discussions and just stayed away from the forums. Sorry if that sounds brusque, but I hope you do realize the import of what you are saying.

Finnforest wrote: Have they released new supportive material since the last eval?   Otherwise I doubt they would want to re-eval something based on the same material, but you could ask.

Sounds like you have an idea for a poll there.

SouthSideoftheSky wrote: Finnforest wrote: Have they released new supportive material since the last eval?   Otherwise I doubt they would want to re-eval something based on the same material, but you could ask.   Yes and no. (This has been up before in this very thread). The conceptual double album Nostradamus (that is one of the more progressive albums the band has ever made - though far from the best) was released only some months after the band was rejected.  The special collaborator (whose name escapes me right now) who suggested Judas Priest to the admin team in 2008 said earlier in this thread that the debate continued after the rejection had been made official and that he brought Nostradamus to the admins attention.  So as far as I understand, they did not get a proper re-evaluation after the release of this clearly relevant album.

You might want to check this, because as I recall, Nost was considered.  I just remember that title being talked about quite alot.  Although perhaps I'm thinking of a post-voting discussion.

In any case, I'm one to be inclusive as well, but I'm not for pushing already busy teams to re-do evals that have little chance of a different outcome.  Unless significant additions to their case can be made since the last request.  If you think so, then I wish you good luck though I'm not the one to champion the cause of this band

 


Edited by Finnforest - November 05 2011 at 14:26

Please note the phrasing:
If I were to make the case for JP's addition...

Currently I have some more important work on my hands than doing all the ground work for this re-evaluation. I'm sure that some other passionate JP enthusiast can help me out with creating a poll and carefully stating its intention.

Now I'm off to the 10cc gig, see you guys tomorrow!


Edited by Rune2000 - November 05 2011 at 14:47

You know, I really don't care as much as to argue any further. Who has the final say in prog related inclusions anyway? Maybe that team should just vote and get it over with.

rogerthat wrote: And nobody would also come to prog archives to research info on LZ or Queen. Or Nightwish for that matter.   I completely agree that prog related is not a good idea but if it's going to be part of the database, let's have some consistency.

I'm mainly concerned about this consistency argument, which is is basically an endless 'If A is here, so should B' kinda argument. Using thtat logic we'll have a lot of influential artists here that we probably shouldn't be here. Like Manowar, who has a surprisingly strong case for PR: they made a concept album (Gods of War), wrote a 28-minute epic suite (Achilles, Agony and Ecstasy in Eight Parts), made a 9-minute ambient instrumental (Today Is a Good Day to Die), covered a classical composition (Sting of the Bumblebee), made a song with orchestra and choir (The Crown and the Ring), constantly tell epic stories in heir lyrics, and surely have had some influence on prog metal, especially the power side of it.
Do we really want them here though? I actually like them() but hellllllllllllll no. I just wanna make sure bands are considered on an individual basis rater than added for the sake of fairness. Two wrongs don't make a right...


Edited by The Miracle - November 05 2011 at 17:06

 

The Miracle wrote:  ..............Do we really want them here though? I actually like them() but hellllllllllllll no. I just wanna make sure bands are considered on an individual basis rater than added for the sake of fairness. Two wrongs don't make a right...

Are you sure you aren't talking about "I", but about "we" ? Not saying I want Manowar here, but I also am not saying that I don't want them here. The point is that we includes all of us (you, me, OP SouthSide...).

Or at least I hope you're not referring to yourself in First person plural.

There is a chance that by "we" you meant PA as a whole, but again, one person cannot speak for a whole sum of all collabs, special collabs, reviewers, admins and members.

Rune2000 wrote: Sorry, but this argument doesn't make any sense. Manowar inspired the progressive power metal? Probably, but progressive metal featured on PA doesn't include power metal bands. Yes, some of them have slipped by through the years but the current policy is that they are not welcome. Therefore adding Manowar to PR as a predecessor to power prog will not fly. JP, on the other hand, have a clear link to Iron Maiden and the early prog metal movement of the late '80s/early '90s.

Not "inspired", but "had some influence on". I meant the whole prog-power genre like Symphony X, Kamelot, etc... That wasn't even the main point though, they qualify because of all those characteristics I listed that fall under the definition of prog. I was just making a grotesque analogy, really.


Edited by The Miracle - November 05 2011 at 19:07

The Miracle wrote: Rune2000 wrote: Sorry, but this argument doesn't make any sense. Manowar inspired the progressive power metal? Probably, but progressive metal featured on PA doesn't include power metal bands. Yes, some of them have slipped by through the years but the current policy is that they are not welcome. Therefore adding Manowar to PR as a predecessor to power prog will not fly. JP, on the other hand, have a clear link to Iron Maiden and the early prog metal movement of the late '80s/early '90s. Not "inspired", but "had some influence on". I meant the whole prog-power genre like Symphony X, Kamelot, etc... That wasn't even the main point though, they qualify because of all those characteristics I listed that fall under the definition of prog. I was just making a grotesque analogy, really.

No, they don't qualify under the definition of prog since then they would be fit for a sub-genre other than Proto-prog or Prog Related.

Symphony X (Michael Romeo and Michael Pinnella to be exact) were primarily inspired by the neo-classical metal movement and Yngwie Malmsteen, who is the pioneer of the genre, is listed under Prog Related.
Kamelot is one of the bands that slipped by in the early days of the Prog Metal sub-genre and will remain on PA out of respect to the early Prog Metal Team collaborators but we have no intention of adding any more Power Metal bands any time soon.