User talk:Enfestid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bpg23 03:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)==Welcome!==

Hi Enfestid, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

  • RC Patrol - Keeping a lookout for vandalism.
  • Cleanup - Help make unreadable articles readable.
  • Requests - Wanted on WP, but hasn't been created.
  • Merge - Combining duplicate articles into one.
  • Wikiprojects - So many to join, so many to choose from...Take your pick!

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 14:44, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Identical pages

Hey,

I noticed you made two new pages, The Apex Theory and Apex Theory, with edit summaries indicating they were copies of another Wikipedia page. Rather than duplicated pages this way, the preferred way is to create redirects. Simply type: #redirect [[other_page]] That way, the wikipedia servers only need to keep one copy of the page, and the other pages will point to it.

Also, with names of bands and such, please keep proper capitalization: e.g., it should be Apex Theory rather than Apex theory.

If you could redirect two of the articles to whichever one is the most appropriate or correct usage (their website seems to indicate it might be The Apex Theory, but I don't really know anything about them, and you seem to, so it'd be better if you made the decision, not me), that'd be great.

Thanks, and welcome to Wikipedia! --Jonathan Christensen 15:16, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Prefontaine

Hi Enfestid, I've finally got round to replying to your points on Steve Prefontaine's talk page. Lisiate 03:10, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:VoKEE Concert.jpg

Warning sign
This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:VoKEE Concert.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Admrboltz (T | C) 01:29, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crysis

Well, if you are developing this, have you considered that by publishing here you are putting the name of your game into the public domain? Not to smart if you want to have copyright protection. Kd4ttc 05:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

What? I'm not developing the game, Crytek is. Did I type something wrong saying I was involved in the game?
Enfestid 12:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Industrial metal

hey, just wondering if you could discuss your reasons for reverting the artists section on industrial metal on that articles talk page? thanks --MilkMiruku 08:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

that's cool, it was more the formatting i was refering to, but see Talk:Industrial rock for a discussion on the inclusion of certain artists/bands on the industrial metal and industrial rock articles. --MilkMiruku 14:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
I was trying to kill the revert war. If i made a mistake then so sue me. Ley Shade 04:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 30 Seconds to Mars

  1. Remember to mark your edits as minor only when they genuinely are (see Wikipedia:Minor edit). "The rule of thumb is that an edit of a page that is spelling corrections, formatting, and minor rearranging of text should be flagged as a 'minor edit'."
  2. Please don't remove material from articles without expanation; this is regarded as vandalism. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, first, it doesn't matter who added the material; articles don't belong to anyone — as soon as the material is added, it's part of Wikipedia. Secondly, while what counts as minor isn't precise, by no stretch of the imagination could it include removing a whole section (even if the material was [partly] duplicated elsewhere), etc.
In addition, the infobox contains names, while the material that you removed included instruments; it is thus not a mere duplication. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
  1. Wikipedia: Assume good faith.
  2. The way that the page looks in your browser with your settings isn't a good reason for setting image sizes, etc.
  3. 200px is standard for music infoboxes such as albums, singles, etc.
  4. There's no need to start a second item in a list with a capital letter. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
  1. If you didn't understand assuming good faith, there's nothing more I can say.
  2. Different browsers with different settings will display text size differently, so that fiddling with the picture in order to make the text fit inevitably fails for some people.
  3. I could list even more article in which editors have made images too big (though far more in which they haven't); that's not the point.
  4. First, standard English rules out a random capital in the middle of a list, and the Wikipedia MoS goes along with this. Capitals are used for the beginnings of sentences, proper names, and words in titles (aprt from prepositions, conjunctions, etc.). What is the basis for the capital that you're trying to add?
  5. The MoS also clearly states that years should only be linked if they're especially relevant to the content of the article (Dates and numbers). Again, the fact that many editors misunderstand or are unaware of this isn't a good reason for linking all years. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Angels and Airwaves

That might need to have the {sprotect} setting. But it only had the template, not the actual setting. That's like having a "beware of dog" sign without a dog. I can't do anything now, but if it's still a problem later drop me a note and I'll add set the semi-protection. -Will Beback 16:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Have another look at your edit [1] before reverting it! HawkerTyphoon 23:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Panic Channel

Thanks for the advice but I really don't agree with your point of view regarding The Panic Channel. I'm new to this and not sure if I'm following the right protocol, but to begin with they certainly aren't a supergroup. A supergroup is comprised of members from more than one band which is, for want of a better word, super. All three former members of Jane's Addiction fall into this category, even Chris Chaney who only appers on Strays, but the new singer, Steve Isaacs, certainly doesn't. If the original two members plus Chris Chaney had Perry Farrell as their lead singer they would still just be a normal group, why should replacing one of the greatest frontmen of all time with a nobody shift them into the sphere of a supergroup? If they had gotten Mike Patton or someone that had already been a succesful artist in their own right then they would be a supergroup, but seeing as this is not the case, they do not qualify as a supergroup.

In terms of their genre, I think that it is a bit strong to completely disregard the possibility that they are Emo just because of the negative connotations that you may associate with the term. If anything, what is on the page wholly supports the argument. For example, "The band's name refers to a state of panic induced by the world media" is a classic example of what is considered Emo. All the other bands that fall into this category have one thing in common other than music style, they are unable to deal with the real world and the success they have generated and generally go around feeling sorry for themselves and their percieved problems, this is exactly what is presented in the quote above. This is not a bad thing, it is just how the bands attempt to relate to their disenfranchised fans.

The first single, why cry, is further evidence that they are Emo, because the depth of the music is completely lacking and they have clearly just tried to write a radio friendly single. They failed.

Basically, everyone acknowledges that the Emo genre exists, but nobody is willing to accept that they like it. Take a look around the other pages of bands that are at the forefront of the Emo movement and even they don't say that they are Emo, why not? because they are ashamed. This does not make it correct to stop calling these bands that are Emo just that because they don't want to admit that they have no credibility, it defeats the entire point of an impartial website.

Bpg23 03:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)Bpg23Bpg23 03:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

You state "The name makes them emo? Since when did the name of a band have anything to do with the music itself? It never did." Why don't you read the sentence on the panic channel page that reads "The band's name refers to a state of panic induced by the world media as well as "channeling the energy inside and outside the room when we create these songs ... we like to think of creating music as a way to channel the panic into something tangible," as stated by Navarro"

I question the status of this band as a supergroup, and it is a question that is supported by the discussion page on supergroups. While the definition of a supergroup on wikipedia states that one is comprised of band members who have made an impression already (which three of the four band members most certainly have) it is unclear in the definition whether all members of the band need to have done so. This debate continues on the supergroup discussion page and it seems that a consensus has been reached that bands that replace a member with an unknown or relatively unknown and change the name of the band should not qualify. I think this gives reasonable grounds to reconsider the notion of the panic channel being a supergroup. Any thoughts? 132.181.7.1 22:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Panic_Channel"

[edit] 30STM Numbers Reverting

Since you and I seem to be the only people editing that page that know what the RIAA certs. actually mean, I figure I'd run this question by you. What do you think the chances are that we can get semi-protection of that one section from unregistered users? They're the only ones that I see causing the problem on the page, and since they more than likely don't know about the history or the discussion page, reverting and telling them to look at either page is going to be pointless since they likely won't do it. Hackstar18 04:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/n/f/User_talk%7EEnfestid_8f7c.html"