Talk:War Is the Answer

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Metal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal articles

New Release Date?

On Facebook they said it's coming out August 8, and the release party is September 18. Hmmmmmmmmmm...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Epeu (talk • contribs) 04:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's coming out september 22. Also, will anyone change the name of the article to "War Is The Answer", as opposed to the incorrect title "War Is the Answer"? Morbus Rising (talk) 18:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC

Songs discussions

Has anyone thought about Dante's Inferno as being a source of inspiration for Canto 34? I randomly ran across Canto 34 (Dante's Inferno) and put 2 and 2 together. Apparently, Canto 34 is about a trip to hell. Interesting when you think about it. Perhaps thats what they (FFDP)tried to accomplish with their instrumental song. signed -M3T4LLik4-

Walk Away

So someone at some point added a track time for walk away. I deleted it as it wasn't verified, but does anyone know where I might find this song to listen to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morbus Rising (talk • contribs) 03:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The or the?

Numerous sources cite the album name as "War Is The Answer". Therefore, it should be spelled that way, as that is the official title, and changing it illegitamizes wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morbus Rising (talk • contribs) 00:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The English language trumps any source you will find. In titles in the English language, articles such as "the" are not capitalized, however short verbs such as "is" are capitalized. Please see WP:ALBUMCAPS for more information. Fezmar9 (talk) 02:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The English language did not effect the spelling of the band name "Korn", a title. If it is spelled by the band that way, then that is the way it should be spelled. Unsourced < sourced. And if you read my notes on that edit, I stated that I could not view that page, and requested anyone with any disputes to post it on my talk page. Strange that you missed that. Morbus Rising (talk) 03:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling and capitalization are two different things. Let's use the example you provided: Korn is often spelled k-o-r-n, but is often capitalized as KoRn, or even KoЯn, and could very easily be sourced in this manner. However, the article is simply titled Korn because in the English language only the first letter of a word is capitalized. Because this issue permits specifically to this article, and there have been other editors moving this page, it would make more sense to have this discussion here rather than on your talk page alone. Also, the links I provided in a few of my editing subject lines, in addition to the one provided above, are functioning – please try them again. Continuing to revert this edit will be viewed as disruptive and a violation of the three revert rule, which will result in being blocked from editing. Fezmar9 (talk) 04:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whether they are working and whether they are visible by me are two different things. I have a browser blocker that doesn't allow me to view that article. So if the album was marketed and spelled (capitalized) by the band WITH the "the" capitalized, it would not matter? As for blocking, it's irrelevant to me; I'm becoming fairly bored with admins threatening blocking, as it seems fairly unreasonable that certain people are given superpowers to run amok without rhyme or reason. Morbus Rising (talk) 05:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the album was marketed and capitalized by the band or the label or whoever else as "WAr iS tHE ANsWeЯ," this article would still be typeset as "War Is the Answer." Fezmar9 (talk) 05:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. How ridiculous. Apparently the English Language violates the freedom of speech. At any rate, I'll wait until you go away to correct it. Morbus Rising (talk) 05:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm at it, how might one make that backwards "R"? I'd like to correctly spell and capitalize the Shock and Raw Tour. Lol. Morbus Rising (talk) 05:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer. Not. Morbus Rising (talk) 00:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The tour name is not spelled with a ya, only stylized with one. Adding it would be a misspelling. Remember, this is an English encyclopedia, not Russian. Fezmar9 (talk) 01:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, moronic. Morbus Rising (talk) 23:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't incorrectly using a Russian character in a tour poster just to look cool more moronic? The word raw is not pronounced with a "Я" and serves no real purpose in this case. Fezmar9 (talk) 18:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Except for visual correctness. Which matters to some people. Oh, and you just issued a personal attack towards either the band or me, so if I was an admin, I would issue my warning now. Thank you, that is all.Morbus Rising (talk) 00:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Track Listing

I have found the track listing here: http://www.play.com/Music/CD/4-/10333667/War-Is-The-Answer/Product.html. I would put in a reference but I don't know how. Apks94 (talk —Preceding undated comment added 07:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I found it too, just last night. They also spell the album "War Is The Answer". I put the link at the bottom, so someone should make it a refference. Morbus Rising (talk) 17:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Webstores are not considered published reliable sources by Wiki standards, and posting a link to a place where an album can be purchased is considered spam or advertising. Please find a new source. Thank you. Fezmar9 (talk) 04:05, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When there's no other reference, you would need to be some form of android to apply to such rules. It was a reference, you really seem to lack some form of reasoning.Morbus Rising (talk) 04:06, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://bandmerch.seenon.com/detail.php?p=107530&v=fivefingerdeathpunch link to the official track listing, as put out by the band. And yes, it is a link to a store (official band store for FFDP), but if you consider it spam, again, it only shows you have no logical thought processes.Morbus Rising (talk) 22:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or you could just wait for a reliable source to come forth. Wikipedia is not news website, so there is no rush to get information posted the second any old source can be found. In the case of a track listing, a source WILL come forth; and a reliable one at that. One reason the guidelines were set up at WP:RS (outside of being considered spam) was because unreliable sources, such as webstores, often change. If the product becomes unavailable, the source becomes unavailable. Published sources and articles last a lot longer. And, as an editor of many album articles, I can tell you that webstores are actually frequently incorrect. Just be patient and wait for a better source. Fezmar9 (talk) 18:47, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.metalhammer.co.uk/news/five-finder-death-punch-war-is-the-answer-track-by-track-preview/ yet another source. Reliable enough for you? As for reliability, that is not the argument; the argument was that you were going to apply rules that, in fact, DID NOT apply. "posting a link to a place where an album can be purchased is considered spam or advertising." your exact words. I also included the band's webstore, which frankly is reliable.Morbus Rising (talk) 00:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously you have chosen not to at least skim through any of the wiki policy links I have provided. Reliability is only part of what makes a credible source. Webstores are not articles, nor are they published. The band's webstore, specifically, might not be considered a third-party source, which are generally preferred over first-party sources. The Metal Hammer source you have provided certainly meets wiki guidelines and may be used. Fezmar9 (talk) 09:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So let me get this straight. You'd rather go with the Metal Hammer source than the Band's Official Store Page? Is that it? Oh and I guess I should apologize for spamming even though at the time the link I posted was the only available information regarding the albums setlist. Apks94 (talk) 04:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would. Metal Hammer is an actual published article from a third-party, the store is not. There is a huge difference between an author for a music magazine that has been around since 1986, and some guy in the shipping department for a website that sells band merchandise. If you had a question about a medical condition, would you rather ask a doctor or some guy with a blog for a valid and educated response? It would have been best to leave the track listing off the page, and wait for what Wikipedia defines as a "reliable source" (a policy which you might be surprised to find out has less to do with reliability, and more about credibility). Like I said before, there is no deadline to create an article and there is no rush to obtain information. Especially when we are talking about a simple track listing. Also, this is from wikipedia's policy on verification, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed." It does not matter whether or not we believe the track listing from the webstore is true or not, it did not come from a reliable source and should be removed. However, since August 12, there have been several reliable sources posted on the internet, so this is not even an issue anymore. Fezmar9(talk) 16:24, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So for summary's sake, Wiki would prefer to verify with a less reliable source than that which originated the information, so as to avoid even the appearance of bias?--Nanban Jim (talk) 22:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't skim your articles, I interpreted what you said. You said that links to webstores are considered spam or advertising, and I specifically countered your argument as illogical, based completely on what you said. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morbus Rising (talk • contribs) 21:57, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]