Rock ‘n’ Roll Wikipedia

It’s conceivable that at the world’s end we will find ourselves in the midst of a fiery duel between Google and the holy Wikimedia Foundation. I try not to think about it too much because picking a victor seems as futile as trying decide who would win in a battle between Batman and Superman. Google is definitely strides ahead in using portable and mobile devices to leap out of the constraints of my laptop. In fact, I find I text Google more than I text half of my friends. Yet, recently, my heart has been falling into the hands of Wikipedia.

(Note: I know that it is strange to compare a search engine with a non-profit encyclopedia but they are both massive suppliers of information and two of the top 10 most visited websites for 2007)

I have been using Wikipedia to fill my head with random knowledge for years. Thanks to Wikipedia I know about radioisotope rockets, Edward Leedskalnin’s coral castle, and far from everything in-between. However, I have been putting Wikipedia to a new use lately; I have been using the gentle white giant to find out about music. How uncool, right? Well, let’s consider it.

Due to their surprisingly well regulated encyclopedic writing standards, Wikipedia is the most bullshit-free and least opinionated digi place to learn about tunes since the early days of Epitonic. I am not saying there is anything wrong with opinionated music sites. In fact, I bask in Pitchfork’s conceitedly assertive reviews more frequently than I remember to eat breakfast and I thrive on every moment of it. That said, sometimes I just want clean cut facts and thats when my love steps in.

A simple search will frequently unveil an overview, history, and discography for nearly any somewhat noteworthy band regardless of what label they were signed to or how many records they sold. Genre links are conveniently placed for finding similar artists and the overview often contains links to their contemporaries. The discography section is utterly amazing. Not only can you see everything they have ever released in a clean manner, you can click on albums to view individual tracks and see credits, track lengths, and positions on charts all around the world for singles. The best part is that you don’t have to see a single advertisement during this process. For an example click here.

Often I’ll hear about a band from a friend and then hop on Wikipedia to learn more. Hours later, I will find I know the history of not only that band but of 20 other bands in their specific music scene. Is it perfect? No. Although there are regulations and most band pages follow them, some pages fall below my quality standards. From time to time you will find factual errors and typos. This is frustrating yet to be expected from a user updated website. Luckily, sources are typically cited so if all else fails, you can still use Wikipedia as a dandy diving board to leap to other relevant sites.

My biggest complaint is that you can rarely listen to the music you are reading about. I know there would probably be legal issues with putting music samples on a site like Wikipedia but it sure would be helpful. I suppose for now we have to settle for the sometimes clunky process of downloading the artists on our favorite P2P sites to decide if we like their music. It may or may not be legal, but using the internet to catch wind of bands you would never have heard about otherwise sure isn’t morally wrong.

Check it: Wikipedia /