Template talk:Cradle of Filth

Awesome, but could we have more?[edit]

Adding information[edit]

don't go too nuts with it - less is more, I think. Just the current line-up, the official albums, and the official DVDs would be plenty; no need for the demos or the "related articles" which is a bit amorphous and could go on for ever... Cardinal Wurzel 20:51, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Related articles could include any band that shares a member (Angoria etc), has collaborated with them, record label, tour partner, literary or filmic influence... Bear in mind it won't just be us that's playing with this. Unless we impose quite strict limits on what's in it it's going to get completely unwieldy and out of hand extremely quickly. We'll end up with a template that's longer than the article... Cardinal Wurzel 21:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not make double disscussions, see my talk page. Michaelas10 21:40, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Order, Order[edit]

"Don't change the ordering, albums and EPs should be at the top." Why? Chronologically the demos come first. You're making some very arbitrary decisions here. I don't want to fight about this - it's silly. Just explain your decision process. How are you ordering what you're putting in, and what are you including and excluding? How are you going to keep people from adding to the "related articles" section? How are you going to decide what's related and what isn't? I understand that you want to keep it to only articles that can wear this template, but how are you going to enforce that? How can you argue that Angtoria (for example) is not a related article? That's a band that includes two members of Cradle (or one and a half, if you want to be picky). Plus, this template could be added to most if not all of the past members' pages - are you going to include them? Are you going to include the bootlegs? If not, why not? Seriously man, unless this template makes untouchable sense to everyone that visits the page, you're going to have a full time job managing it. Cardinal Wurzel 22:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discography page is a top idea, by the way. Cardinal Wurzel 22:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Albums and EPs are the most important chronology, and they should come at top, just like done in all the other music band narvigation templates.

I believe I just said what's related and what's not (see my talk page), and there are no more releated pages at this moment.

No, I can't prevent users from editing it and add more, just like you can't prevent from users from vandalising a page.

I am not going to include bootlegs. First of all, these bootlegs aren't completed nor very verified. Second of all, bootlegs aren't included in most of the templates too.

I am adding the template to the previous members' pages.

Michaelas10 22:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you're getting annoyed, and I'm not trying to provoke you, but you're really not answering my questions. Your answer so far has been "because I say so". How can you say that the Blood Divine is a related article and Angtoria isn't? They're both bands that contain Filth members. I agree it would be disrespectful to put a Filth template on Angtoria's page (if that's what you're trying to say), so why is it not disrespectful to do it to The Blood Divine? They're still a different band... Cardinal Wurzel 06:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are an intirely different band, its not like the most of their member were in Cradle of Filth, or Cradle of Filth owns them. Ok, then two members used to work for Cradle of Filth among many other bands, doesn't it mean we have to put the other bands' template on their page? Now The Blood Divine is created of Cradle of Filth's members, after they left while the recordings, one of them even came back. Michaelas10 08:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm. What do you think, Haunted? You're keeping quiet! Cardinal Wurzel 09:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]