Talk:The Blood

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An individual covered in this article, The Blood, has edited Wikipedia as The cardinal of the blood (talk • contribs).

Contents 1 The Cardinal's Response 2 The Blood - Wikipedia Entry 3 My recent edits 4 objective integrity 5 not very professional 6 An invitation to the annon IP 7 re opening titile punl/oi

[edit] The Cardinal's Response

the reason i became a punk is an objective record ... and a paradigm that should be visible ... not hidden by fools ...

when encyclopedia-fools simply-desribe the impact of marx's communist manifesto as the reason for tragic ethnic cleansing in russia, and eastern europe, and do not too make a powerful observation on the development of humankind's thrust for modern futurity ...

or encyclopedia-fools describe nietzschean works as the fundamental ideolgy behind nazi genocide and not an aesthetic ridicule of one dimensional thought ...

then knowledge is in the hands of mediocre-morons who have no passion no will power and no vision ... knowledge is the hands of those who are safely tucked away in the bedlam of their doldrumatic life ...

The world of imperfection at its greatest. Anyhow this is wikipedia where everyone has the right to edit whatever subject they choose. Theres no qualification to edit everyones opinions are equally ignored as we only accept information from reliable sources. When an individual has more than the customary passing interest but a distinct tie to the subject it becomes hard to let go of the words. Please refrain from further personal attacks whether specific or generic.

In your case Cardinal as a member(founder) of the band you have a conflict of interest, which you need to realise will make other editors scrutinise your edits with a degree caution, when they consider WP:OR, WP:NPOV, WP:V or even WP:NOT. When you add to the article things like your quote about seeing The Who in concert and its inspiration to you, this needs to be sourced from a third party like "Rollingstone Magazine", "Sun newspapers", or some other publication before it can be included. Some of this information your better placing on your own webpage and let third party editors find and add to the article. or just drop a note here and ask for another editor to include. That said you can also create your own account and user page where such quotes are acceptiable. Gnangarra 13:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Blood - Wikipedia Entry

Since starting this Wikipedia entry last year (2005) I am proud to say we now have contributions from lead singer of the band, the Cardinal, who was able to clarify and submit additional points as a source of info. Many thanks.

It is a shame, however, to see the Blood article suffering (like so many others) from wanton vandalism by editors, some even claiming to be moderators. Like 'Spylab' for instance, who doesnt actually seem to know anything at all about this band. How people can waste all thier time just trying to deface wikipedia is beyone me. I have no choice but to apply for protection for the page.Saintgeorge

• Please do not make false accusations of vandalism. I have kept all information (and even searched out information to add) that is factual and actually about the band. The content that I deleted had absolutely nothing to do with the band. It was uncited opinion that violated the Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view guidelines. Wikipedia articles are not for band members (or anyone for that matter) to treat as a personal blog to express their philosophical beliefs about various subjects. Spylab 13:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My recent edits

I made these recent edits: deleted content that was blatantly opinionated, improved the writing style, added relevant links, and deleted a list of uncited quotes. There is no precedent for having a long list of quotes by and about a band. The list that was in this article offered no context or reason why they are relevant, and some of the quotes appeared to be song lyrics, not quotes from articles or books.Spylab 14:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)Spylab

can you respond to this please; you say that the content was opinionated ... well the picture on our album 'false gestures' which was released 25 years ago is hardly objective ... my band the blood is returning to the stage and the recording world and i am trying to put the reasons why this return is taking place into some kind of political-aesthetic context ... yes i was angry with fundamentalism then and i am still frustrated by it now ...

i believe people have a write to believe in what they want to as long as they do not believe in annilating each other because of their beliefs ... what do you believe in ...

as for precedents just like laws they they are changed all the time ... what are you going to change that is worthwhile changing ... while you sit in your safe little room ...

i do not want money or fame ... i just want a world without hate ... i will put myself in harms way to achieve it ... what are you doing to help achieve it ... the cardinal

• That's all well and good, but Wikipedia is not a place to advertise bands or promote a point of view. It's supposed to document verified facts. The reason I deleted the list of quotes is that it didn't say where they came from, or why they are relevant. If you think that some of those quotes are important for helping people learn more about the band, point out where they came from and explain why they are important. And if some of them are song lyrics, they should be labelled as lyrics, not quotes. Also, articles on Wikipedia should be written in clear, plain language so everyone can understand what they mean.SpylabSpylab

thank you for responding ... i will try to respond to what you have said ... i understand what you have said but it might take a few goes to get it right ... thanks again ... the cardinal

• It's looking better now — and as you can see, I added more information about the history of the band.Spylab 18:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)Spylab

thank you once more ... the writers i sited helped me to understand the confusion and manipulation of my past ... the reason i have just written and will record ... 'there's a punk@ the opera' ... is that i hope to be able to help in some way to picture this movement in my life ...

i tried to put this into the punk ideology section because punk was a phenomena that i live breathed smelt felt bled for lived for and nearly died for and am now going back into with new work ... there's a punk@ the opera ... i thik its important ???

'Punk ideology, as a subcultural movement, challenged defiantly the smooth-clean-dream of un-freedom that, political philosopher, Herbert Marcuse wrote about in his 60s classic 'One Dimensional Man. Marshall Berman wrote that to be modern is to be both conservative and revolutionary at the same time. Punk politics was the chameleonic spectre of this paradox in action. Berman's 'All That Is Solid Melts Into Air' is, paradoxically, a stealth-tempest that whispers hope to those who might, in futurity, be annihilated as a result of religious fundamentalism. My band, The Blood, are the iconoclasts of the inconoclasts and punk ideology, the subculture it unleashes onto the urban streets, and the neo-political theatre of shock rock it generates, reflexively challenges the barbed-wire-mummys who repressively choreograph humankinds' civilizing process. Bob Dylan wrote; 'mothers and fathers throughout the land dont criticize what you cant understand':punk ideology demands that we dont understand what we cant criticize: that we dont bow before to the mesmerizing zombies thrown. The Cardinal

Cardinal - you might want to read WP:BLP. I realize this isn't actually a biography page, but it is inappropriate in general to edit pages on yourself. It's not a problem if you are just correcting errors, but it is a problem if you are adding significant amounts of content, as you appear to have done here. We can agree that true "objectivity" is impossible, but nevertheless, significant subjectivity problems are unavoidable when people edit entries about themselves. We would not want the Donald Rumsfeld or Tony Blair pages to be made up mostly of edits by those subjects. Wikipedia is not the place to advertise your band, to write your autobiography, or to tell the complete story of what you think makes this band important. It is an encyclopedia; what is appropriate here is the addition of documented material from reliable sources.--csloat 00:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou commodore; i want to work with you ... wikipedia ... i understand how incredible free access to knowledge is ... but bringing together knowlege in aesthetic translation is too ... i can identify my whole life as going through as proccess of this translation ... thats why the title to new work is called ... 'there's a punk @ the opera' ... i want to work with you and i feel i have something to record in neo encyclopedic sense ... help me i will listen ...

i tried to put this into the punk ideology section because punk was a phenomenon that i live breathed smelt felt bled for lived for and nearly died for and am now going back into with new work ...

is it not important why i am going back into punk ... in the punk ideology sense ... i still think the point is being missed here ... all writers performers etc etc ... have arrogance ... vanity if you will ... it is the character-spirit that drives them ... that encourages them to question their own ethics and the ethics of others ... alongside the incrediblie technological communications age we dwell in now ... there are many people who have also changed and those changes are important to record and explore ... all i am trying to do is explore ... and leave an ethnographic statement of that exploration ... i do not compare myself to anyone else ... i am both a zombie and unique at the same time ... all i am trying to do is identify what has happened to me ... because of others ... because of my self ... how i have coped with this/that journey ... how i feel about the journey i am at this moment in now ... i feel a responsibility to do this ... wikipedia is a wondrous idea ... i am just challenging its flexibility to adapt ... to remain multi dimensional ... to be perpetually chameleonic ... whilst remaining authentic to the discourse and reflexivity of humanity and thereto the history of humankind as it unfolds ... punk rock has been a significant part of that ... i feel i have significant iformation about punk ideology ...

how do we say what or who is important ... a man standing in front of a tank in china ... a suicide bomber ... a man who died on a cross ... the point as marx argued is to change the world not just talk about it ... 25 years ago when 'false gestures for a devious public' and 'megomania' were released i had many death threats ... i have spent the last quater of a century learning or attempting to be objective or 'neutral' ... it might be argued that the swiss were neutral in the second world war ... it might be argued that being neutral could have seen the nazi's obliterate the jewish race ... it may be argued that being neutral is about keeping yourself safe ... so no i guess i would not argue that im being neutral ... are you ... wikipedia can have other dynamics to ... like a living pulse ...

i am also a youth worker who has recently taken 40 young people over to belfast from england ... we went to a school where catholic and protestant dance sing and create together ... they were so pleased to see us because they still feel isolated from the world ... their schools are still segregated ... i just organized a trip for young arab and jewish children ... who have been going to school together at a school called 'hand in hand' ... since 1997 ... to come to england at christmas 2006 ... they accepted the offer ... i raised the funding and still have it ... then i had an email from them saying they were stuck in a bunker ... because of the recent acceleration in troubles ... but would i please not forget about them ...

knowledge is one thing action is another ... punk ideology ...has dimensions in it thatencourage action ... i think i can tranlate that in neo encyclopedic dynamic ...

i am always being mis represented ... i knew nothing of political thinking ... i left school befor i was in my teens ... i have just find thsat 'the blood ' have a 'my space' i dont know who is controling it ... the blood has a tribute site coz the guitarist and co writer doied living a rocknroll life style ... i only just find out about that ...

i thought wikipedia represented a way to get my authentic self heard ... i understand it is more problamatic than that ... never the less it is an opportunity ... i did not set up the blood wiki pedia page and have only recently started to put my own position on it ... cheers the cardinal ...

I think you're right that there's an abstract discussion to be had about the question of "neutrality," but in terms of Wikipedia standards and policies, that debate is not relevant. The policy here regarding neutrality is spelled out at WP:NPOV and it ought to be clear. Neutrality does not mean that positions cannot be represented - but it does mean that they should be represented fairly as the positions of particular individuals or groups rather than as the opinions of wikipedia. I don't think you're going to be able to make a strong case to change that approach here, even though many encyclopedias, including the indispensible Encyclopédie, do not adhere to such an approach. The revolutionary thing about Wikipedia is its free content license, however; if you have a particular project in mind that is influenced by Wikipedia, you are free to pursue that project on your own utilizing Wikipedia content within the terms of the license.--csloat 20:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

thankyou commodore for your guidance and explanation ... im listening and ill do my best to adhere to the revolutionary dimension of wikipedia ... its a strange paradox straining at the leash to be a part of a team at the same time as champing at the bit to be and individual ... i wont say anymore at this point as you can see from the above who i am ... where i am striving to go ... what i am struggling to achieve ...

01-12-06 the evidence i have given ... regarding my experience of hearing the whos live at charlton on this day ... is as reflexively objective as i can be and i would argue constitutes a fact ... if you like ill get some university professors to underpin my ... i believe authentic and sociologically valid ...stand point on the above matter ...

You know, I think you might all get a leg up if someone in the media, writing about Wikipedia (or the Blood), wrote about this. Recursive, I know, but then you might be able to include the abstract of this very discussion on the Blood's page, because it would be from a secondary/journalistic source. Given the contents would be included in the article, we could, for example, write on what the Cardinal has been arguing about, and document it as a matter of fact and note its significance. That is, if the article included the contents of the discussion. I think it would be very interesting. Food for thought. -Bordello (66.91.56.142 22:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC))

[edit] objective integrity

thanks very much for the objective integrity of those words and ideas that are written directly above ... the cardinal

[edit] not very professional

can someone explain to me why someone keeps putting the seifeld episode at the top of the blood article ... it does not seem very professional ... i really dont understand ... -unsigned by The Cardinal

• Because that is Wikipedia policy. Whenever ther are articles with similar titles, there has to be See Also links to the other articles or disambiguation pages. Also, please use your Wikipedia account and sign your comments. Spylab 13:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

thank you spylab for explaining this to me ...

• I have added a similar message on the Seinfeld episode article, directing to this article. Spylab 21:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An invitation to the annon IP

Please read these policies conflict of interest, wikipedia is not, and no original research. I have removed the unsourced infomation and quote. The reason for this is that wikipedia is not a crystal ball, the quote was removed as its original reasearch. I inivite you to create an account but please be aware of Wikipedia policies. All content must be from a verifiable source. Gnangarra 01:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re opening titile punl/oi

i think we are/were a punk band who had one trak on an oi compilation album which does no define us as an oi band ... i would like to change this ... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The cardinal of the blood (talk • contribs) 12:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC).