Talk:Einstürzende Neubauten/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 → |
Industrial classification
the problem as i see it is that by classifying e.n. as industrial (or any other classification) is that we are immediately attributing a number of false characteristics that we'll have to later dispel if we are at all interested in creating an accurate source of information. would it not be better to (since e.n. is pretty unique, i feel) build up by starting with what neubauten is rather than hitting wide generalizations and then reducing to the essence? --Iosif 03:14, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
- Hrm, well I certainly don't want to give a false impression of what EN are about, and we can certainly go into greater detail about them in the main body of the article, but I do think that one way or another, the opening sentence should give a quick pointer to the sort of thing a newcomer to EN's work might expect. If you can do that without using the dread word "industrial", then that's fine by me, but I don't think "EN are unique, it's impossible to say what they sound like" (or something along those lines) is much use to anybody. I don't like these genre labels more than anybody else, but they do at least give a rough idea of the sort of area people work in--not ideal, I agree, but better than nothing, in my opinion. --Camembert
- I agree, the opening should not be tedious and ambiguous if at all possible. And you are right, it is not impossible to describe what e.n. are like, but I think it is difficult to compare them *well* to the overwhelming majority of bands generally considered industrial, especially considering their 23 year + history now. It is a common problem in the industrial genre; many bands who started the classification (intentionally or otherwise) now disagree with the classification or have found themselves no longer under its umbrella. Another problem is one that I have encountered myself. When someone asks, well, what is e.n. like, I can't really answer without immediately breaking their history into 3 or more pieces and then trying to generally describe those sections without stumbling through horrible inconsistencies there either. Their name suggests the same; whenever they are likely to become pinned down for doing one thing or another, they quit and do something else entirely. One example of this is illustrated early on in the 80s. E.N. had gotten a reputation for demolishing stages and terrorizing audiences. Soon after the reputation was established, they quit with the drills and jack-hammers. I guess that if I thought e.n. was "just a band" I wouldn't be making such a fuss. But I value the truth and nature of things very highly and it is true that e.n. is not just a band. So, with that being said (and I heartily applaud your dislike of genre labels) perhaps we can accurately start off by categorizing e.n. not by artificial music genres but by the historical and environmental qualities that they emerged from, e.g., the west section of a divided berlin falling apart. I hope that sort of approach might bear fruit. What do you think?
-
- What you're saying makes a lot of sense to me, and I like the way you've recast the introduction now. Looking forward to the rest of your edits. Hrm, I think I'll go and listen to Kollaps now... --Camembert
Erin Zhu
I don't think it's appropriate to have anything about Erin Zhu and her father on this page CheeseLover 02:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- Erin Zhu is the webmaster of neubauten.org. She achieved this position with money that she extracted from her father as compensation for child rape. This money has financed Bargeld and EN. I have documentary proof of these facts. How are they inappropriate? Larvatus 02:47, 1 October 2005 (UTC)larvatus
- If this must be mentioned at all, I think it would be more appropriate in the Blixa Bargeld article (it's already mentioned at Erin Zhu). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 05:16, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
- Einstürzende Neubauten has officially advertised Erin Zhu as their executive producer (http://www.discogs.com/release/231233) and webmaster (http://www.in-your-face.de/stories_490.htm). Who among us is a better judge of what is appropriate to mention in this article, than its subjects? Larvatus 10:51, 2 October 2005 (UTC)larvatus
- Sorry, I should have been more clear. I was specifically talking about the issues regarding Zhu, her father, and WebEx. I don't think the Einstürzende Neubauten article needs to go into the level of detail that was given in a previous edit (and there is already more detail at WebEx for those interested). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:23, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you for your clarification. However, I still disagree with your conclusion. At this point in their history, Einstürzende Neubauten is a vanity enterprise subsidized by Erin Zhu. An article that declined to follow the money would be woefully biased. Larvatus 23:22, 2 October 2005 (UTC)larvatus
- Funny how my response was considered a "personal attack", when by far it wasn't. Whilest the real bias remains. Oh well, I guess this is the everlasting effect of the egomachinery & it's disciples. You know who you are. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.166.234.173 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Is this in response to any part of the previous discussion? I, for one, have no idea what you mean. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 01:34, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- No, this was the reply to something that was erased (view the history of the page). I simply posted that I think none of the bias still pestering the neubauten article, Bargelds article, Erin Zhus article and Michael Zeleny should be there. This clearly upsets some of the other users. To the extent that they speak for others.
- So what's stopping you from editing out the alleged bias on the basis of factual information provided for your learned consideration? Larvatus 03:00, 13 October 2005 (UTC)larvatus
- I'm sure if I even tried to touch it, someone would turn it right back. The whole thing makes a encyclopedia obsolete, should every person that have met/known any of the members of E.N and had a bad experience with them, post said experience here? Because that would make a long article (I'm sure) and if so, should this rule apply to every wikipedia entry? I'm certain that there's a lot of people that would like to present you in a diffrent manner then. Personally, I wish I'd never heard of Erin Zhu, her trial and the rest of the information concerned, sadly I now do, and I still think it's none of my business. But if this is how people want it, then so be it.
- You might have better luck with edits signed with your own name. Anonymous contributions tend to be discounted in this forum. As for things that are none of your business, just be thankful that I abstained from posting letters wherein Erin Zhu reassures Blixa Bargeld that impotence is not a big deal, and confirms her eagerness to be penetrated with his firm hand in lieu of his flagging penis. Then again, doesn't that shed light on beautiful music they are making together? 68.66.84.235 09:02, 19 October 2005 (UTC)larvatus
- I'm sure if I even tried to touch it, someone would turn it right back. The whole thing makes a encyclopedia obsolete, should every person that have met/known any of the members of E.N and had a bad experience with them, post said experience here? Because that would make a long article (I'm sure) and if so, should this rule apply to every wikipedia entry? I'm certain that there's a lot of people that would like to present you in a diffrent manner then. Personally, I wish I'd never heard of Erin Zhu, her trial and the rest of the information concerned, sadly I now do, and I still think it's none of my business. But if this is how people want it, then so be it.
- So what's stopping you from editing out the alleged bias on the basis of factual information provided for your learned consideration? Larvatus 03:00, 13 October 2005 (UTC)larvatus
- No, this was the reply to something that was erased (view the history of the page). I simply posted that I think none of the bias still pestering the neubauten article, Bargelds article, Erin Zhus article and Michael Zeleny should be there. This clearly upsets some of the other users. To the extent that they speak for others.
- Is this in response to any part of the previous discussion? I, for one, have no idea what you mean. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 01:34, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Funny how my response was considered a "personal attack", when by far it wasn't. Whilest the real bias remains. Oh well, I guess this is the everlasting effect of the egomachinery & it's disciples. You know who you are. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.166.234.173 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you for your clarification. However, I still disagree with your conclusion. At this point in their history, Einstürzende Neubauten is a vanity enterprise subsidized by Erin Zhu. An article that declined to follow the money would be woefully biased. Larvatus 23:22, 2 October 2005 (UTC)larvatus
- Sorry, I should have been more clear. I was specifically talking about the issues regarding Zhu, her father, and WebEx. I don't think the Einstürzende Neubauten article needs to go into the level of detail that was given in a previous edit (and there is already more detail at WebEx for those interested). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:23, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Einstürzende Neubauten has officially advertised Erin Zhu as their executive producer (http://www.discogs.com/release/231233) and webmaster (http://www.in-your-face.de/stories_490.htm). Who among us is a better judge of what is appropriate to mention in this article, than its subjects? Larvatus 10:51, 2 October 2005 (UTC)larvatus
- If this must be mentioned at all, I think it would be more appropriate in the Blixa Bargeld article (it's already mentioned at Erin Zhu). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 05:16, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Weaselwords?
Einstürzende Neubauten and they released their first LP Kollaps, a strange and new mixture...
that's just the writers opinion, so I'm removing it.
The band's next foray, Halber Mensch (1985), may be seen as the developmental breakthrough of their musical career
again, this is just the writers own opinion, and doesn't sound encylcopedic, but since I'm not sure how to change the sentence, I'll leave it up to someone else. Hotdogger 13:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
