User talk:Blackmetalbaz

December 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Adrian Erlandsson, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Alexfusco⁵ 02:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Valley of Decapitated Horses. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Closedmouth (talk) 06:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Metal-archives

Metal archives might not be the best source (a book would be), but it is a source that can be used for a niche genre. Unlike you said, metal-archives is not as open as a wiki, all changes are done through change requests that are checked thoroughly before they are applied. Deleting the sources isn't doing any good for anyone (I even asked about metal archives on the WP metal project and it seems to be an accepted source). Since the sources are in the article it is a more stable and reliable list.

There is no statement on WP implying MA can never be used as source. It is in fact a peer reviewed site with editorial oversight (2 things a questionable source has not, according to WP:VER). No ordinary user can edit genres on MA, only about 20 moderators can (out of 84000+ contributors). The moderator's policy is to be careful with genres, to thoroughly check them and to keep them up-to-date. I can't find any policy or guideline on WP stating these kind of sites are unreliable (Not even WP:V/WP:RS). I don't always agree with their genres, they're not always correct, just like the genres on rockdetector, allmusic or whatever third party site. Kameejl ^(Talk) 19:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Response

I was wondering if you could respond to this. Inhumer (talk) 01:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Rofl, I forgot the link, Category talk:Grindcore groups. Sorry about that. Inhumer (talk) 02:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any sources for Iskra or Dystopia being Grind?Inhumer (talk) 18:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I reread it, it does sound POV. Inhumer (talk) 00:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

When it comes to genres, myspace isn't really a reliable source.Inhumer (talk) 03:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

You know, I don't think we could find one, though I do have a source for the pv article in general.Inhumer (talk) 01:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Here it is Inhumer (talk) 01:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it should also be redone, anons made a compete mess out of itInhumer (talk) 01:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm gonna continue looking for more sources for PV. Inhumer (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Interviews with Eric Woods(Member of Man Is The Bastard.) [1] [2] Not much, but something.Inhumer (talk) 21:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:LLN

I think the label releases are sufficient to establish the group's notability, so I don't feel too bad about removing the tag. However, you should note that I was helping your case in reverting. Chubbles (talk) 18:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that... I deleted the comment on your talk page as soon as I'd posted it! Case of me not reading thoroughly and being over-tired. Sorry! As it happens I also think the whole LLN thing is notable, but the problem is that as a scene it is almost by definition unsourcable (interesting in and of itself, but clearly a problem). Any apologies once again for the misunderstanding! Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I would say it's pretty reasonable that not all of those groups have their own articles; some of them are most likely hopelessly obscure, but if they nevertheless have a connection to the scene, I think it would be destructive to blackball them from the list. It's the same principle one would use for a record label; the label's page should have a comprehensive list of bands that have released material, even if some of those bands do not, or will never, have their own page. That said, it'd probably be worth de-linking the redlinks. Chubbles (talk) 01:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I totally agree, but do they in fact exist? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 01:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Are there some which appear to be nonexistent? I haven't gone through the list... Chubbles (talk) 01:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I'll do the same tomorrow. I'll also go through and probably weedle out ones that haven't actually released anything. Cheers for the help! Blackmetalbaz (talk) 02:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Just running a Google search on the first five or six, a bunch of them have thousands of Ghits and reviews on metal webzines. Some of them only rate about 8 Ghits, but most of the list comes up on this forum post discography: [3] Nothing close to a reliable source, but perhaps worth investigating as a benchmark. I guess anything that's only pulling 8 Ghits can probably be removed. Chubbles (talk) 01:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's a litle something to help you out :

Welcome!

Hi Blackmetalbaz! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! 69.210.245.152 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)Mooncrest

Re: Les Legions Noires

Well, my rule of thumb is always "if it's notable, then it shouldn't be too hard to find sources for it". Although they may exist, if they are lacking many sources some editors on Wikipedia may not be in agreement about it's notability. I must ask though, why is it, "almost by definition, impossible to get hold of reliable sources", as you stated? ≈ The Haunted Angel 00:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, this sounds rather tricky. To be honest mate, I'm not sure how I'd go about doing this... I presume somewhere there would be a site about them, even if not anything official, but I'm afraid that's all I could suggest - this does indeed sound like something difficult to source. ≈ The Haunted Angel 01:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

LLN

Well, let's consider some things here. The article also has entries in French and Dutch; the bands listed appear on at least four different notable labels. This says to me that, at the very least, the subject itself is notable. Which means that I seriously question the utility of an AfD; it would be self-destructive to delete an article that clearly deals with a notable topic. I haven't made any attempts to source the article. There are clearly some rumor-mongering statements that can and should be removed from the page; however, clearing it out entirely is basically tantamount to removing all of the claims that the page has to notability anyway. I'd rather not see it AfD'd - underground metal has enough trouble establishing its legitimacy on this site as it is - but it'd certainly make sense to take a careful razor to the more outlandish statements. Chubbles (talk) 01:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, well, there goes that. Chubbles (talk) 01:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Daughters and DEP

Sourced where? I'll provide my own sources. Let's do this. 24.90.176.253 (talk) 18:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The sources are already listed on the articles' discussion pages. I'm not disputing that these bands could also be listed as mathcore, and indeed believe that this should be what is present in their infoboxes. I can provide sources myself perfectly well to demonstrate this. Your apparent problem is that you do not believe bands should be listed under multiple categories. This however is not only incorrect but facetious in the extreme. However, should you be able to provide a reliable source stating that these bands cannot be considered grindcore to any degree, then cite them and we can mention this interesting contradiction within the body of the article. Should you be confused as to what constitutes a reliable source for such discussions, a book or commercially published music magazine would be appropriate. If in the mean time you revert any my edit to add these bands to the Grindcore category, it will constitute vandalism, for which you have been warned once already. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 22:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I should mention by the way that for now I am assuming good faith and that your misunderstanding is that bands can belong to multiple categories. This is of course untrue. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 22:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Immortal caption correction

Hey, thanks for correcting my wrong caption. I don't know what on Earth possessed me to make me see the "new" logo on Pure Holocaust cover. Uzyel (talk) 18:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the "Death 'n' Roll" article

• First: There's a discussion page on that article where we talk (and negotiate) the changes made to it.

• Second: and what about this "unreferenced" template? Are you sure about that? Or did you happen to miss the 38 references on the bottom of the article?

• Third: yes, there are "unverified claims" on this page. And why? I haven't posted the references to back 'em up (lack of time) - that's why. But, beyond that... "original research"? Please point that out to me.

• Fourth: instead of promptly wiping away anything unsourced, why don't sit back and wait? This article is obviously going through heavy revision, and blanking is considered vandalism.

I would ask you to please, refrain making edits of that nature for the time being... And no, this is not an ownership issue - I just want the proper time to finish my edits.

Musicaindustrial (talk) 12:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)