User talk:FireCrystal/Archive 1

Hello, FireCrystal! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Please explain

I entered an entry for Witchhammer from Norway on the List of power metal bands, which btw is a fairly well known band in Norway, and more known than a lot of the other bands already on the list. You deleted my entry, seems like you don't fell they're "important enough", thats fair enough I accept that. But you also marked it with twinkle, this gives me the impression that you accuse me of vandalism, isn't that a bit harsh? Please explain the reason for this accusation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.166.49.72 (talk) 11:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Anata on technical death metal

Hi, I have found a reference to Anata as a technical Death Metal on BLABBERMOUTH. I think it is a reliable source as the guy who writes has been in the metal scene for years. I haven't added it to the page for two reasons: I don't know to create a reference without ruining the text and also, I am not sure that BLABBERMOUTH is ok as a reference. Please take a look at :

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/Blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?Mode=Archive&Date=7/3/2005

--Zlogdan (talk) 19:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Explanation

Sorry, my purpose was to remove the vandalism of "Corey "Gay" Taylor" as obviously that isn't his name and is a WP:BLP violation, I have removed it with a separate edit. Thanks! blackngold29 04:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Sock of Navlos or whomever?

Can someone explain this to me? I have no clue why this ip added a sock template thinking I'm a sock puppet of Navlos or whoever this is on my page...? FireCrystal (talk) 05:20, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I haven't a clue as to why. I suggest trying to bring it up with an an Admin to try to get it resolved. GreenRunner0 02:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

The IP (whose contributions show that he is User:Peter Fleet) gave no reason whatsoever so I reverted it. Schuym1 (talk) 01:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Belphegor image

I've been thinking of using the image I uploaded in the 2005-present section in the Belphegor article (unless you feel its too poor). I uploaded it to the Commons, but how do I get it to override the wikipedia one? Dark Prime (talk) 20:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Medieval Rock

Why have you deleted Medieval Rock? - please give reasons. The article is well sourced and carefully written, it includes a summary of the Medieval metal article and main article link for anyone looking for that.--Sabrebd (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Response to last talk post. Think your reference to Neo-medieval may be an typo - do you mean Medieval Rock? This is not an article on neo-medieval but only on rock. I note your edits are almost all on heavy metal. As I have demonstrated Medieval Rock is a genre used by musicologists to define something broader than just that. There were a number of posts on this problem in the discussion section to which I added. For readers who are not necessarily a fan of German Heavy metal then it is this redirect is very confusing. If you read the article you will see it is well sources and well written and based on major texts, and in no way detracts from the importance of the Mittelalter article. The article itself makes clear the distinction so it will not be confusing to those who look at it. At the moment the metal version is blocking out the other wider versions. This adds something significant to the knowledge of rock music on Wikipeadia. I ask you politely to reconsider and restore, it was a lot of work and does not damage or detract from anyone else's.--Sabrebd (talk) 21:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

In no way do I want to remove the Mittelalter page. I think problem is that I used 'medieval metal' - it must be 'mittelalter metal' rather than a redirect from medieval metal. Would you be kind enough to restore my last version 9so it is clear that disagreement is over) and I will adjust link as soon as I can? Glad we could sort this out. Perhaps we could talk sometime on building up the Neo-medieval page. Thanks again --Sabrebd (talk) 21:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the restore. There is no medieval metal article, but I used it as a sub-heading (it needs to be Mittelalter Rock to prevent confusion - at least both). In answer to your queston: Neo-medieval is larger than medieval rock, as medieval rock is larger than medieval metal/mittelalter. Other genres that also have neo-classical input are folk and classical. So I was wondering about re-writting that one to balance all four and point to the Medieval Rock and Medieval Metal aritlces with summaries as is the Wikipediea style. I have posted something in the discussion formum of the neo-classical article. Thanks again, we will talk more about this I hope.--Sabrebd (talk) 22:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry additional, this may be another source of confusion. Metal Metal redirects to Medieval Rock. I assumed it should redirect to Mittelalter it may be hard to find. Is this what you meant earlier? I am happy if it does. Perhaps we could point to Medieval Rock to understand the history of medieval metal before Mittelalter at the beginning of the Mittelalter article. Hope this is clear - it is very hard talking in these boxes.--Sabrebd (talk) 22:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Leviathan Review

Wikipedia defines a worthy review as: Professional reviews may include only reviews written by professional music journalists or DJs, or found within any online or print publication having a (paid or volunteer) editorial and writing staff.

Our website is obviously an online publication, we advertise for large clients like Nick Cave and The Big Day Out Music Festival, and our staff is a mixture of paid and volunteer workers. I have also provided a few more arguments in the "reasons for edit" box, on the Leviathan page.

So the review should stay there, you have no legitimate reason to take it down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theradu123 (talk • contribs)

ok, my apologies for an 'adverse' reaction.

however, i'm not quite sure i understand what the problem here is. i don't went the website ('The Dwarf') to have it's own wikipedia page, i agree that it doesn't need nor yet deserve one, that would be simply self-serving. so i'm not exactly sure why you are talking about how 'The Metal Observer' had a page but was deleted, because that is not our disagreement here.

however, it cannot be disputed that 'The Dwarf' (which i admit i work for, but for free, so i have no financial interest or anything like that in it) is a professinal music website, and much more than simply a fan website (as is evidenced by important advertising clientele, for example)

so i really don't see the problem that is present. 'The Dwarf' is a professional musical website, it meets the requirements that Wikipedia have established, and in the end, the Leviathan page only benefits by having another professional review, another opinion. i would understand if there were already 10 professional reviews from more notable sources like "Rolling Stone" etc, but that isn't the case

thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theradu123 (talk • contribs) 03:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Symphony X

In summarizing an edit you just made to this article, you stated that "Allmusic can't be trusted for metal subgenres." This is news to me, and troubling too, because I frequently think of Allmusic as one of the more reliable sources for music articles—especially for metal bands, who tend not to get much attention in the mainstream press these days. Where did you learn this? Huntthetroll (talk) 02:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I checked out the debate on the WP:RELY talk page, and found myself swayed by Prophaniti's argument. While I don't intend to write off Allmusic entirely, I will from now on double-check its pronouncements on metal genres. Thanks for the heads-up. Huntthetroll (talk) 03:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I reviewed the FAQ section on the band's own website. It's quite detailed, and includes responses from each of the band members. They cite numerous classical composers as influences. Guitarist Michael Romeo also cites Randy Rhoads and Yngwie Malmsteen, the progenitors of neo-classical metal, as influences. This is pretty solid support for the claim that SX is neo-classical metal, so I'm going to use it as a source in place of Allmusic. Huntthetroll (talk) 03:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Good point about self-published sources. I'll see if I can hunt down a third-party source. Huntthetroll (talk) 04:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Jackpot! And it's an actual newspaper article, too! To find it, though, I had to weed out dozens of search results that simply copied the very article I'm trying to improve. I also found these two interviews with Romeo, which are extensive albeit conducted by what seems to be an entirely online publication. Huntthetroll (talk) 04:29, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

FYI: I've nominated this article for peer review, so we can get feedback on the edits we've made. Huntthetroll (talk) 11:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review

I've submitted three articles for peer review, including Symphony X. Feel free to comment on the status of any of them. Huntthetroll (talk) 02:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: This

Why did you make this revert? You didn't use an appropriate edit summary for the revert and you have not taken part in the discussion on the article's designated talk page. If you had read the discussion page you would've realised that it was a consensus-edit of mine that you reverted. Thanks in advance for your reply. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 23:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I saw your last edit. Could you please join in the discussion to discuss the genre? Thanks bud. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 23:07, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Industrial folk music

Thanks for drawing this article to my attention, I had completely missed it in my trawl and probably because this title did not occur to me. I was thinking of producing something on industrial labour songs or industrial work songs, at some point (as opposed to agricultural work songs), which is what this is really about. I think the genre is legitimate, it was pushed hard during the Second British folk revival (1940s-60s), but I am really not sure about the title. I will have a look into the terminology. I cannot see anyway it is related to modern 'industrial folk' as you (and I) mean it, so some sort of disam. or hat process will be needed, assuming this name is kept. I will look into the name and post when I find out a bit more. Thanks again.--Sabrebd (talk) 10:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree, will look into it as soon as I can. Cheers. --Sabrebd (talk) 23:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Have posted on discussion site for this article. The term 'Industrial folk song' was favoured by A L Lloyd and that would have been clearer I think, but it is probably not worth moving this. I will give the article a clean up soon and add a hat. Should the hat redirect to neo-folk?--Sabrebd (talk) 07:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Have cleaned this one up as best I can and added link to neo-folk at the top. Without moving the whole thing to say Industrial folk song, I don't think I can make it any clearer. Let me know what you think.--Sabrebd (talk) 00:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - I would be happier with this being on Industrial folk song, and so if we have evidence of use I would support a move. I did check the history and this page started as a page about Swedish industrial folk. The issue will come up again if there is a separate industrial folk page someday.--Sabrebd (talk) 07:32, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, FireCrystal. You have new messages at Talk:Behemoth discography.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cannibaloki 16:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The Epitome of Pantalgia

This article was not eligable for an A7 speedy deletion as A7 only applies to articles about real people, organisations or web content. It specifically excludes articles about books, software, albums etc. The full criteria is at WP:CSD#A7. It was also not eligable for an A9 speedy as we have an article on the artist (at least at the moment, if the artist's article is deleted then it would be eligable for A9) - full criteria at WP:CSD#A9. When having a look at the edit logs to see my reasoning for removing the speedy I also noted that you'd restored your speedy after someone had removed it. If you weren't aware anyone other than the page creator may remove a speedy if they don't agree with it and as speedys are meant to be clear cut cases this is generally taken as a sign that a speedy isn't appropiate (per WP:DP#Speedy Deletions). In this case I have more sympathy with you restoring it as the editor that deleted was, in my opinion, at fault for not giving a reason for removal. I'd have still prodded it or taken it to AfD however. In the particular case of albums where the artist is notable but the album isn't it's usual (based on AfD consensus in the past) to redirect to the artist rather than delete. Dpmuk (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:Mitch Lucker

Could you please provide some sources indicating the notability of the subject? Surely, anything important could be placed in the band article? I'd normally be happy to just move it to the appropriate place and tag as needing attention, but the article was redirected to the band article as per this AfD. Unless some notability is demonstrated, I'm gonna have to agree with that result and redirect the new article back to the band article. J Milburn (talk) 17:32, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I've redirected them all to the band article. J Milburn (talk) 16:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, FireCrystal. You have new messages at Cannibaloki's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cannibaloki 06:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! Cannibaloki 06:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanx

Thanx for the help, my English is poor. (J.P. Sola Christus (talk) 01:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC))

Hey no problem. If you want any advice and or help just come to me. :) FireCrystal (talk) 02:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox

Hey there, just want to get this clear for future reference... has a consensus finally been reached over the commas/linebreaks issue in infoboxes? If so, could you point me towards it so I make sure I adhere to it in future? I always thought commas looked horribly messy, but don't want to go against consensus! Cheers, Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Apologies

It took me among quite awhile to figure out what the genre categories are for, and I could probably guess it was a stress to remove the categories from all those album articles that I equiped with the deathcore album category. It won't happen again and I'll be sure to remember only an artist's discography subcategory belongs in those types of categories. • GunMetal Angel 17:47, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Album Chronology Response

Take a look at the WP guidelines, it does not suggest that EP and LP should be listed differently (as they are very similar in their concept). It DOES suggest singles and albums should be listed separately. Luminifer (talk) 00:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Day into Night

It took me a little bit to figure out what was going on, but I think I would have gotten it quicker if I'd not read this at 2 AM :-) The article is now at Day into Night, with Day into Night (album) and Day Into Night as redirects to that title. The one you prodded (can't remember which one) I simply redirected to the other title: there wasn't anything wrong with it, and redirects are cheap, so nothing wrong with keeping it as a redirect. Is everything like it should be? Nyttend (talk) 06:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the way I had the redirects at first was because I was confused. It wasn't some smart way to move the pages in the best way — far from it :-) Nyttend (talk) 06:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Precisionism

Since I've never met you before (I mostly work with geography and the U.S. National Register of Historic Places), I looked over your userpage, and was intrigued by the idea of a "precisionist philosophy" — what's that? Having read the linked page, I have to say that it fits me better than any editing philosophy that I've read before. Yay for precedents :-) Nyttend (talk) 06:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Melodic black metal

Hi, you know what happened to the page of melodic black metal? Why it was deleted?

Bye (J.P. Sola Christus (talk) 19:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC))

Anthrax

Hi - some time ago you agreed with me on WP:ALBUM regarding the Anthrax chronology. No one who reads the Anthrax talk page even appears to be listening to what I am saying. If you don't care, fine, I won't mind if you don't do anything, but if you have anything to add there I would appreciate it. Thanks either way, and sorry to bother :) Luminifer (talk) 04:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The Black Dahlia Murder

Hello, FireCrystal. You have new messages at Talk:The Black Dahlia Murder.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rammstein

I don't listen to metal myself, but there are 65*thousand* results for rammstein +"progressive metal". I'm A-ok with you showing those are mostly crap, but since I don't listen myself, and there were articles and reviews including it, I didn't feel it appropriate to say "Oh it's just Allmusic", etc. - BalthCat (talk) 23:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

If you care

No Time to Bleed is released today, a lot of imformation may be exposed on reliable sources and a little odds and ends need updating, wanna help? - GunMetal Angel 21:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

It's alright now, I think I posted this about 8 days ago. — GunMetal Angel 23:12, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

The only thing I have left to do is buy it, haha!! — GunMetal Angel 23:49, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

BS

		The Special Barnstar
		Just thought I'd drop you one for using a userbox I created ;) Most people don't, so I'm glad that you have! Keep up the good editing. MelicansMatkin (talk) 04:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Heh, no problem; you deserve it for more than just the userbox ;) MelicansMatkin (talk) 04:47, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

How come I can never get one of those? : ( – GunMetal Angel 22:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)