Talk:Sleigh Bells (band)

new pic

This picture is not cool, we need another one — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.154.114.29 (talk) 16:35, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Definitely. - 76.87.94.81 (talk) 00:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Singles

The article mentions more singles than are actually listed down at the end of the article in the "Singles" section. I don't rightfully know how to correct that myself so I thought I'd at least point it out for someone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.41.29 (talk) 10:46, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

 Fixed. Thank you for pointing this out. Sleigh Bells' discography was separated out into a stand-alone article a few months ago, and then recently merged back with this article. There was a VERY lengthy discussion over what defines a single at Talk:Sleigh Bells discography, and what you see in the discography section is a result of that discussion. I've made minor corrections to the body of this article to reflect the discography section. Fezmar9 (talk) 21:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Songs featured in other media

Unless there was some sort of reaction or result from one of Sleigh Bells' songs being featured in a commercial/trailer/movie/whatever, could we either delete it or move mention of this to its own section? Having a song featured somewhere doesn't seem to have much to do with Sleigh Bells' history, especially since it has more to do with the label signing away the rights than the actual band choosing to have their music played in a Dr Pepper commercial. Fezmar9 (talk) 16:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Being bold and going ahead with this edit. Fezmar9 (talk) 20:20, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Definition of a single (again)

A very lengthy discussion at Talk:Sleigh Bells discography, which involved a WP:DRN discussion and WP:3 input, took place almost exactly a year ago. The result of the discussion decided that a single must be released independently from an album (which was a silly conclusion considering that's just the definition...). It was also said in the discussion that claiming a music video necessitates a single boarders on a fringe theory, and that many of the songs Ylightflight is claiming to be bonafide singles were in fact just music videos or plain old songs. I am going to break down each source Ylightflight provided and explain why it doesn't support the claim. Also note that industry wide, the term "single" is thrown around a lot. There needs to be some evidence that the song was actually independently released from its parent album. And note that I am also only addressing the newly added so-called "singles," not the ones that were previously listed.

Song	Source	Why it doesn't support claim
"Crown on the Ground"	[1]	The word "single" isn't used once in the entire article. This is a review of a song. Pitchfork reviews many songs, but that doesn't make it a single.
"Rill Rill"	[2]	Out of all of the proposed singles here, this is the only marginally convincing source provided. It actually has a release date, however I cannot independently corroborate this release date with any other online sources, so I'm not entirely sure what that date is indicating -- possibly just the music video release.
"Born to Lose"	[3]	Same as "Crown on the Ground," this is just a Pitchfork review that doesn't even mention the word single. Pitchfork even later acknowledged that "Born to Lose" was just some song released for online streaming, and that "Comeback Kid" was actually the first real single from Reign of Terror.[4]
"Demons"	[5]	This only shows evidence of a music video, not a single. This was the primary issue in the original discussion.
"End of the Line"	[6]	Again, the word "single" is thrown around a lot in the industry these days. While this article says single, there is no actual evidence here of an actual single being released.

Sources provided for singles that were already previously listed here before Ylightflight's additions included links to iTunes, which while that's not usually considered an encyclopedic source, it is definitive evidence of a single and cannot be disputed. This would have been a more convincing argument had something like that been provided for these five songs. Until definitive evidence can be provided, these songs should not be listed as singles. Fezmar9 (talk) 21:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Here's an example for evidence of "Bitter Rivals" being a single: Both Entertainment Weekly and Consequence of Sound describe "Bitter Rivals" as a single, and I can see that the song was actually released as a single by visiting Amazon and Spotify. Here's an example of a song from another band that was erroneously described as a single: The band Russian Circles recently posted the song "Deficit" to Soundcloud. Several websites describe "Deficit" as a single[7][8][9], however I cannot find any place to legally obtain the song in the format of a single -- not through any online retailer, nor through the label or artist directly. It was mistakenly described as a single. This happens very frequently in the industry and this is exactly what happened with "Crown on the Ground," "Rill Rill," "Born to Lose," "Demons" and "End of the Line." Fezmar9 (talk) 00:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Merging Alexis Krauss

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To merge Alexis Krauss into Sleigh Bells (band) as notability is established only or primarily through the band. Klbrain (talk) 17:03, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

---

I don't see her as needing a separate article. Her notability comes from Sleigh Bells. Her website "Beauty Lies Truth", the only other venture mentioned at the article, doesn't really meet WP:N. 162 etc. (talk) 19:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

• No objections, so I've merged the article per WP:BANDMEMBER. 162 etc. (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
• Her notability comes from being in Sleigh Bells and in the web of reliable and verifiable sources about her that merit a standalone article. Notice that no one had spoken about the requested move, either in favor or opposed, but let this stand as an objection. Alansohn (talk) 02:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

• @Alansohn: Per WP:BANDMEMBER: "Members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability." So, unless she is notable for something that is not Sleigh Bells, this should be a redirect. 162 etc. (talk) 17:01, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

• 162 etc., "individual notability" means that they meet the WP:GNG standard of notability based on reliable and verifiable sources about the individual bandmember. She meets that standard. Perhaps you might try to find consensus for your position. Note that no one has agreed with you here. Alansohn (talk) 17:14, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Definite merge as only notable through musical act. SkidMountTubularFrame (talk) 03:40, 24 May 2022 (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.

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 17:05, 29 October 2022 (UTC)