Talk:Rocket from the Crypt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Band name[edit]

The name of this group is too similar to the original name of the Dead Boys - Rocket from the Tombs - to be a coincidence IMO. Perhaps a future update or edit to the article could address this.208.32.173.71 16:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read the first paragraph of the "Band History" section, titled "Formation." They based the RFTC name on RFTT. --IllaZilla 20:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Band members[edit]

I removed the list of band members from the main text as the information appears twice in other parts of the article, firstly in the Infobox and then in a table of "Rocket from the Crypt lineups". I now see that my edit has been undone with the explanation that "the members list is useful as it provides more information about real names and instruments, etc. than the other sections. the purpose of the lineups table is to show a chronology of change & releases". I dispute this.

If you want to include real names then put them in the Infobox, and the instruments played already appear in the lineups table. I think having the same information in the article in various different places is clumsy and adds nothing to our knowledge of the band. Plus, having the table justified to the right and the band listing justified to the left in the same section just looks plain awful and makes the whole article so much harder to read.

I'm inclined to revert to my original edit but that seems a little petty. I'd much rather see what other users think before taking further action. So does anyone else have an opinion...? Kevin Boyd (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I like having both lists in the members section (the members and the lineups table). The infobox is a separate thing entirely; it exists to provide an at-a-glance synopsis of pertinent information. If having some piece of information in the infobox meant it were unnecessary to have it anywhere else in the article, then it would follow that we should remove all mention of the band's place of origin, years of existence, record labels, etc. from the body of the article. Basically I'm arguing that the infobox and the article body are independent of each other, so what we're arguing about are just the 2 lists in the "Members" section.
It's my opinion that the list of members and the lineups table provide 2 distinct types of information. The members list gives the names of everyone who was ever in the band, the years they were in it, their real names (since this band used stage names), and the instruments they played. All of that would be too much to cram into the lineups table or the infobox and would clutter it (particularly if some members played a variety of instruments, which doesn't happen to be the case with this band but is in a lot of others). The lineups table, on the other hand, is more of a chronology; it shows who was in the band together at any certain time and what recordings that lineup played on.
There is some precedent for having both types of lists. See Slayer and Slayer band members. In this case the lists are split into separate articles, as the lineups list is rather long. Another example is Nine Inch Nails live performances which is a lineups list separate from the main article. I don't believe the RFTC lineups list is long enough to warrant splitting off. For an example that doesn't split the two see Black Flag. Note that both Slayer and Nine Inch Nails are FAs. Of course there are other examples of FAs that only use one type of list, or don't even list the members at all, but I believe both are helpful, that they provide different sets of information, and that in this article they are short enough to list side-by-side without the section seeming cluttered. I disagree with you that it "looks awful" or makes the article harder to read, though I'm willing to come to some kind of compromise and would like to hear others' opinions. --IllaZilla (talk) 05:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I take your point that the Infobox and the main body of the article are separate entities and agree that it's the Band Members section where we seem to disagree. I don't necessarily agree that there would be too much information here to cram into a single table - the current table already indicates the instruments played so you'd only really have to add a column for "real name". But anyway, this is all academic as I don't think we're going to agree on this at all. As a compromise I'd be happy to at least address the layout issue by adopting the basic template used in the Black Flag example you cite, where the list of members and the separate table run vertically and are both justified to the left rather than being side-by-side. As a design fascist(!) I'd be reasonably happy with this approach. Kevin Boyd (talk) 22:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of 'Bring Us Bullets'?[edit]

This song was one that featured in Crank, but I am intrigued as to why it has no mention here in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.182.106.211 (talk • contribs) 07:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think "featured" is a stretch...it was just used in the soundtrack, along with a number of other songs by other artists. It's not like it was written specifically for the film (a la "I Don't Want to Miss a Thing"). Anyway, I don't think it's really pertinent to any of the sections currently in the article. After all, the movie came out 4 years after the album (Live from Camp X-Ray, which "Bring Us Bullets" is from) and almost a year after the band broke up, so it's not like it adds to their notability in any way. Plenty of their songs were used on compilations, etc. but mentioning this is little more than trivia. If it did bear mentioning, I think it'd be much more appropriate to mention it in the Live from Camp X-Ray article rather than the main article on the band. You'd just have to cite a reliable source, such as the soundtrack listing on IMDb or somesuch. --IllaZilla (talk) 08:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rocket from the Crypt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:43, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rocket_from_the_Crypt&oldid=1195549868"