Album Covers and Artist Pictures

oh sure.. and dig up up a photo of the first Genesis lineup as well to be historically accurate.

hard to say with groups that changed lineups more than some change their shorts

my two cents is to find the most album representative version of the group.... personally I think the current Eloy picture is good but never mind me... I dig what you are saying there. I just enjoy sticking my nose in where it is not needed or wanted.

Quinino wrote: Generically right, but this one comes directly from 1st album cover, so if we want to be historically correct it's the way to go On a side note, Micky - as you can see my avatar stays young forever,  guess the little guy never even had to shave, I think I'll keep him forever on the job.

I do like to occasionally change mine.. but like a good worn pair of skivvies. I always return to the most comfortable.

I get that it is from the first album cover... but this is a band that did more than one album, in fact had a whole career of albums, and that album was not among their signature albums. It is like the example of having a picture of the first Genesis lineup and having it used for the artist page here... it is not the lineup associated with the group. Even if it historically accurate... in showing the first incarnation of the group.

again don't mind me... just for discussions sake..

Thanks for your contribution, mate ! (I already withdrew my suggestion, before Eugene gets mad at me )

Eugene's happy you've sorted it out. 

http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=281

Lousy choice, don't you think?

They are all from the late eighties, it seems, and the line-up was very "flexible" (the girl-bassist you mention is much more recent).
I'd say, from an esthetic point of view go for the 1st photo (the gentlemen look a little cleaner )

http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=2069

Awkward addition, seems this band is nothing more than Hawkwind under disguise.

Other albums attributed to "Hawklords" and "Hawkwind Light Orchestra" were included on the main band page, and correctly entitled to make clear that fact - hence I propose now we consider doing the same here with this one (no reviews at the moment so the "move" looks viable).

In alternative (and less work?):  making an explicit reference (and link) at the end of the Bio, and again the reverse on Hawkwind page referencing back these "Warriors", what do you think?

^ I'll post there to see what they think (good job, anyway, thanks)

Quinino wrote: http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=2069 Awkward addition, seems this band is nothing more than Hawkwind under disguise. Other albums attributed to "Hawklords" and "Hawkwind Light Orchestra" were included on the main band page, and correctly entitled to make clear that fact - hence I propose now we consider doing the same here with this one (no reviews at the moment so the "move" looks viable). In alternative (and less work?):  making an explicit reference (and link) at the end of the Bio, and again the reverse on Hawkwind page referencing back these "Warriors", what do you think?

I'm many years removed from the snake pit of genre team work and band additions but I would guess it was established that cases like that merited separate additions. As much as we wanted to to have artistic freedom... we were under the heavy hand of the classic admin team .. god bless them.

not 100% sure man... just a note that back then we had an active Admin team who spent more time in our business rather than policing the shoot first ask questions later Wild West forum he used to have hahahha.

I would tend to think that guidance from high was to add it separately than just fold it into the existing Hawkwind discography. It was surely a question that would have come up back then when we were filling out the database. I'd just leave it as it is, unless Uwe and his crew of dope smokers want it changed.