Talk:Bauhaus (band)

Legacy and Influence.

I've decided I want to try discussing this properly and make another attempt at improving the article. My argument for keeping the comments from band members about Bauhaus' influence and/or lack thereof on the goth scene and/or music style is as follows. I think it's relevant to have the band's perspective on their legacy if it isn't excessive and third-party sources are cited too. The third-party source says they are considered the inventors of goth. One band member says he felt other bands were more influential another accepts the label. To me, that is presenting the information neutrally and takes up only five sentences. Arguably, it's the only part of the section that gives any real information, the rest just catalogues every band that's ever mentioned Bauhaus. If we wanted to cut down on or cut out that catalogue and add other voices (like more music historians) to the section to give a more complete overview of the band's legacy I'd be in support of that. I'd also be open to suggestions to make the section read more neutrally. But don't go deleting information until it's been agreed on here and don't accuse me of having ulterior motives like hating The Cure or being an obsessive Bauhaus fanboy. Lynchenberg (talk) 18:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

wp:undue [1] it is not relevant to transform this article in an essay about the goth genre, either quoting every single sentence by a Bauhaus member. A member of a band is not a music historian or a music expert. There is a big problem of editing by two Bauhaus fans, non-neutral approaches in the present case, which is bordeline to this, WP:SPA. Woovee (talk) 20:06, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I don't agree. The section does not quote every single sentence by a Bauhaus member, it is one Kevin Haskins quote about his perspective on their legacy as an influential goth band. Hardly an essay or every quote and seems relevant and I don't see what's non-neutal about it, as this isn't my opinion, it's a band member's opinion. If you want to counterbalance with a dissenting opinion from another source, that would be fine by me. As your your accusations, this is just speculation about I don't think it matters whether I'm a Bauhaus fan or not. I think my edit history makes it clear I have a variety of interests and edit often, I don't just use it for this issue. Let's see what other people think. Should Haskins' perspective on the band's influence on the development of gothic rock be included? talk) 20:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

RfC: References referring to or about bands other than Bauhaus

. Is it necessary to include a cited source unrelated to Bauhaus that describes Siouxsie and the Banshees as art rock?

Referring to this edit.

Is it acceptable to include a quotation from Peter Murphy that also associates the gothic rock genre with The Cure in a citation where Peter Murphy says he felt Bauhaus was closer to reggae-punk like The Clash?

Referring to this edit. Lynchenberg (talk) 19:02, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

No and Yes Summoned by bot. This is a bit to unpack and I haven't read the long history and prior Rfc. For the first, I think the legacy section should be about the band's legacy and how they see it. It gets too weedy if you try to discuss the Banshee's genre here. People aren't coming here to learn about the Banshees. For the second, I think it's a useful quote to include since it's the band discussing their influences. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

• No and Yes. The first question involves a violation of WP:SYNTH in which Bauhaus isn't mentioned but a comparison is being made. The second question is simply a matter of helping the reader understand where Murphy was coming from, how Murphy views the milieu within which Bauhaus formed. The practice of inserting a footnote in the reference is covered at WP:FOOTNOTE which says "A quotation allows readers to immediately identify the applicable portion of the reference. Quotes are also useful if the source is not easily accessible." The Murphy quote satisfies the requirements. Binksternet (talk) 00:18, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

• It is correct to say that this appendix "although The Guardian also considered the Banshees as "art rock" " can't be included in the article as it doesn't talk about the band Bauhaus.
• One notes that all the sources in this wiki biography contain footnotes reproducing the quotes in their entirety inside the ref. Woovee (talk) 00:23, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

My take is this. I just thought the information on Peter Murphy feeling Bauhaus was reggae-inspired was relevant information, and Haskins saying they felt more art rock than goth was relevant information. I don't feel strongly about mentioning The Cure in the main text as it's not relevant to the real point about reggae. I do think it's necessary to include in the citation for context however, as that's just the standard. In terms of Siouxsie and the Banshees, I see no reason to name drop them in the main text either, but potentially in a lower citation. I don't see any harm in having these references either, but if it really bothers Woovee that much I am fine with omitting them as it's not necessary to provide the relevant information. If we're to omit that however, we should also omit the quote about Siouxsie and the Banshees playing art rock as it's not necessary. I also want to state that this is the last time I want to comment on the matter. Woovee's made this very personal and I've been going through a lot lately. It's not really relevant here specifically what, but I am not doing well right now and had been avoiding editing Wikipedia as during a time I was feeling increasing emotionally unstable I made a comment I regret. I had not been following this discussion as a result, but had not logged out of Wikipedia on all devices, so when Woovee pinged me on my page, blaming me for the results of the rfc and going on about how he "despises" me and making more accusations. I reported this to an administrator who quickly responded to the out-line-comment I made during my issues with another matter, but rather than telling Woovee to desist as I was told to desist, I was essentially told to go fuck myself and my edit asking for help was reverted. This has made me realize responding was a mistake, and I would like to take a break from Wikipedia in general to leave this matter behind entirely. When responding to this rfc, I would like to respectfully ask Woovee to avoid making this personal if the administrators won't, and not to ping me privately or bring me up again. Just argue the issue on it's own merits, and if all you want at this point is no mention of The Cure or Siouxsie and the Banshees in the body of the article, consider this me putting a vote in your favor on that issue. I just want this to be over. Peace. Lynchenberg (talk) 00:32, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

• If Lynchenberg, "sees no reason to name drop" "siouxsie and the banshees" in the body of the article for Haskins' quote, they will have to ping/contact all the users who replied to their previous rfc, and ask them if they would not oppose to this change. And to avoid confusion, they'd show them the new version they would like to see in the body of the article, and write it inside this {{xt| }, to make it in green color. Woovee (talk) 00:27, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

If the person setting up the RfC changes their mind, they can !vote differently. The RfC stands by itself, though; its question is not voided. Binksternet (talk) 15:25, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Implementing the RfC conclusion about Kevin Haskins quote

• Talk:Bauhaus_(band)#RfC:_Quote_from_Kevin_Haskins
• "Clear consensus that a band's own properly attributed view is appropriate for inclusion on the page about said band."[2]

In September–October, we decided to include a quote from Kevin Haskins. The quote in question is as follows:

Likewise, Kevin Haskins felt that bands such as Siouxsie and the Banshees were more influential to goth subculture than themselves and mentioned that Bauhaus were "...more three dimensional, more art rock".

References

Woovee removed the quote seven times on the same day in July 2021,[3][4][5][6][7][8][9] violating WP:3RR, and five times in September. In October, Woovee removed the quote ten times, and in November six times.

What does Woovee want? Here's a comparison of proposed text versions. First is a version put forward by others:

• Peter Murphy said he felt their contemporaries had a larger hand in solidifying what became goth. Likewise, Kevin Haskins felt that bands such as Siouxsie and the Banshees were more influential to goth subculture than themselves and mentioned that Bauhaus were "...more three dimensional, more art rock".

Here's the version that Woovee kept inserting:

• Peter Murphy said Bauhaus "were more aligned to The Clash than anything else that was going around. The Cure and those people really solidified what became goth". Likewise, Kevin Haskins felt: "the Banshees who came before us, were more of an influence on the Goth movement [...] Bauhaus were more three dimensional, more art rock", although The Guardian also considered the Banshees as "art rock".

I don't have any problem with the Murphy quote adding mentions of the Clash and the Cure. The problem I have is with Woovee's removal of the link to Goth subculture, the swapping of clear summary text for more of a bandmember quote, and the addition of The Guardian assessment of the Banshees as art rock, which has nothing to do with Bauhaus, and is thus a violation of WP:SYNTH. I also have a problem with Woovee's novel reinterpretation of the RfC; the losing party in a consensus-forming discussion should step aside and let the consensus stand, not fight it tooth and nail. Purposely interfering with an established consensus is WP:Tendentious editing.

Let's keep the wording proposed by the successful RfC. Binksternet (talk) 02:44, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

• It is correct to say that this appendix "although The Guardian also considered the Banshees as "art rock" " can't be included in the article as it doesn't talk about the band Bauhaus.

Haskins talks about "Goth Movement" and music and art-rock, It is more about the genre. Concluding "goth movement" could be transformed in [goth movement|goth subculture] rather than [goth movement|gothic rock], or vice versa, is wp:original research. Woovee (talk) 00:28, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

It's simply reading comprehension. Goth subculture is goth movement... same idea. Binksternet (talk) 15:23, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Murphy's view about their legacy

This version had been present in the article from 8 months, from February'21 until August'21.

Murphy felt contemporary dark bands like the Cure had a larger hand in solidifying what became goth.. Woovee (talk) 07:19, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

What does "dark bands" mean? Not clear to the reader. Binksternet (talk) 15:23, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Binksternet What was this about ? -> "Re: your edit summary of 9 December 2021 "the RfC overrode your wording preference from earlier in the year. You cannot restore it""

There wasn't anything relative to The Cure in the question that was asked in this rfc (which was based on a Kevin Haskins interview). And here the part about the Cure is based on a Peter Murphy interview.

see below the rfc and also the specific edit or instance on which people were invited to give their opinion.

Reminder - copy / Paste of the rfc:

"Should Haskins' perspective on the band's influence on the development of gothic rock be included? User:Lynchenberg (talk) 20:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Referring to this edit."

Woovee (talk) 02:47, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Before the RfC, you were doing everything you could to blockade other editors' changes in that paragraph, browbeating Lynchenberg, edit-warring, behaving badly, even interfering with the RfC wording. The RfC decided very strongly against you. Through the RfC, you lost the power to change how Bauhaus is described in that paragraph. Yet you decided you were the paragraph's arbiter anyway, framing your preferred version as the notional RfC result, which was absolutely false, and a violation of WP:Tendentious editing. You should stay out of that paragraph altogether. Binksternet (talk) 03:28, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

This is not how our community works. We don't hold a grudge on anybody like you do it right now with this kind of posts and attitude.

No decision was ever made at a ANI to prevent me from posting in that section of the article! This remark from you "you lost the power to change how Bauhaus is described in that paragraph." is your own opinion /judgement. And you keep on bullying me endlessly repeating and reposting the same unpleasant things, trying to discredit me.

You haven't replied to my question, because this rfc was not about The Cure in the Peter Murphy interview but about the content of another reference / source, a Kevin Haskins which concerned another sentence in the section. This is counter productive.

Last November, you commented on this edit [10], replying "what "dark bands" mean? Not clear to the reader" to which I took note and withdrew the "dark" adjective [11]. That was fine, the version was stable. And one month later in December, once I had stopped editing on this article, you suddenly changed your mind and erased the edit [12] on which we both agreed in November. This is wp:pointy, and stubbornness. Woovee (talk) 04:52, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

RFC: Which version should we use ?

Which version should we use ?

Version 1 :
Peter Murphy said he felt their contemporaries had a larger hand in solidifying what became goth.[97]
Likewise, Kevin Haskins felt that other bands were more influential to goth subculture than themselves and mentioned that Bauhaus were "...more three dimensional, more art rock".[98]

or

Version 2 :
Peter Murphy said he felt contemporary bands like the Cure had a larger hand in solidifying what became goth [97]
Likewise, Kevin Haskins felt that bands such as Siouxsie and the Banshees were more influential to goth subculture than themselves and mentioned that Bauhaus were "...more three dimensional, more art rock".[98]

Referring to the footnotes of references 97 and 98 which both include the entire quotes of the musicians, inside the brackets:

[97] : "[Peter Murphy:] We were more aligned to The Clash than anything else that was going around. The Cure and those people really solidified what became goth, I suppose".

[98] : "[Kevin Haskins:] I’ve always felt though that Siouxsie and the Banshees, who came before us, were more of an influence on the Goth movement. We chose to wear black, and our first single was vampire themed and the press tagged us. I can relate to it to a certain degree, but I feel that Bauhaus were more three dimensional, more art rock". Woovee (talk) 04:54, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

References [97] and [98] with titles, links and footnotes

[97] : Marszalek, Julian (26 July 2011). "Peter Murphy Interviewed". The Quietus. Retrieved 27 November 2015. We were more aligned to The Clash than anything else that was going around. The Cure and those people really solidified what became goth, I suppose.

[98] : Robert Gourley (January 25, 2018). "Bauhaus Between The Covers [Kevin Haskins interview]". Please Kill Me. PleaseKillMe.com. Retrieved 18 April 2021. I've always felt though that the Banshees, who came before us, were more of an influence on the Goth movement. We chose to wear black, and our first single was vampire themed and the press tagged us. I can relate to it to a certain degree, but I feel that Bauhaus were more three dimensional, more art rock. Woovee (talk) 04:54, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

!Votes

• Version 1. Like user:Lynchenberg said, I don't find necessary to mention The Cure and Siouxsie And The Banshees in the main text, as the footnotes already reproduce the entirety of the quotes including the names of those bands. Woovee (talk) 04:55, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
• Here's a voting notice for version 1 from user:Lynchenberg who found references 97 and 98. See more of his opinions in the comments section. "From Lynchenberg (talk) 00:32, 17 November 2021" "I don't feel strongly about mentioning The Cure in the main text" "In terms of Siouxsie and the Banshees, I see no reason to name drop them in the main text either" "If all you want at this point is no mention of The Cure or Siouxsie and the Banshees in the body of the article, consider this me putting a vote in your favor on that issue".Woovee (talk) 04:55, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
• Version 1, as long as the more specific quoted material remains in the notes.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:02, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Here's the comment of user:Lynchenberg (who found the references 97 and 98) and who doesn't feel strongly about mentioning The Cure and Siouxsie And The Banshees in the main text. I copy / paste his view because of the last sentence of this message below :

"From Lynchenberg - 00:32, 17 November 2021":

"I don't feel strongly about mentioning The Cure in the main text as it's not relevant to the real point about reggae. I do think it's necessary to include in the citation for context however, as that's just the standard. In terms of Siouxsie and the Banshees, I see no reason to name drop them in the main text either, but potentially in a lower citation".

"If all you want at this point is no mention of The Cure or Siouxsie and the Banshees in the body of the article, consider this me putting a vote in your favor on that issue."

""From Lynchenberg - 03:37, 10 September 2021":

"I'm willing to not quote the parts where they mention the other bands ... as they're not necessary."

"From Lynchenberg on 03:37, 10 September 2021":

"We could reach a compromise by not naming any other specific bands in the Haskins quote and just focusing on how he views Bauhaus."

--Woovee (talk) 04:55, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

This RfC is poisoned by its offering of green text versus red text examples. It's non-neutral and should be closed with no result. Binksternet (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Edit-warring by Woovee

The phrase "Kevin Haskins felt that bands such as Siouxsie and the Banshees were more influential" has been the target of a long-running battle by Woovee. Woovee removed the phrase seven times in one day in July 2021,[13] five times in September, ten times in October, six times in November, and now in 2022 has done it again.[14] Woovee was described as the "sole objector" to the phrase at the "clear consensus" we obtained last October in the Talk:Bauhaus_(band)/Archive_1#RfC:_Quote_from_Kevin_Haskins. Changing that consensus now with a flawed RfC is not going to happen. It's not strong enough to overturn the previous consensus. At this point it's a behavioural issue. Binksternet (talk) 05:35, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Also, Woovee drove autistic[15] user Lynchenberg from the project by hounding him about Bauhaus. Lynchenberg had a long-running problem with Woovee's behavior,[16] and was repeatedly gaslighted and devalued by Woovee. In the end, Lynchenberg finally threw in the towel and said basically "whatever", which are the comments that Woovee is happy to quote now, picking up Lynchenberg's surrender flags as battlefield souvenirs. But Lynchenberg fought for a long time against the misrepresentation of sources that Woovee was inserting into the article. Lynchenberg should not be listed as an ally of Woovee. Binksternet (talk) 06:15, 4 April 2022 (UTC)