Talk:Worlds Collide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

This article has been automatically rated as Stub-Class by WikiProject Albums because it uses a stub template. If you agree with the assessment, please remove |auto=yes from the WikiProject Albums banner above. If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the |class= parameter in the WikiProject Albums banner above and removing the stub template from the article.

Contents 1 Fair use rationale for Image:432681.jpg 2 SOS 3 Fair use rationale for Image:Apocalyptica-Worlds Collide.jpg 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Worldscollide.jpg 5 Too Much Trivia

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:432681.jpg

Image:432681.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SOS

the track SOS resembles a song by the band oomph! called "niemand". by that i am refering to the main melody of the chorus. as apocalytica have appeared in one of their videos, i think its not too unlikely for SOS to actually be some kind of coversong(?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.127.97.154 (talk) 23:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Apocalyptica-Worlds Collide.jpg

Image:Apocalyptica-Worlds Collide.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Worldscollide.jpg

Image:Worldscollide.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 16:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too Much Trivia

I merged the trivia section into the article and removed some irrelevant information, but Alinblack insists on reverting my changes. I don't think that information about songs which didn't make the album or artists approached to help create the album are relevant to the article—it's too trivial. ~MDD4696 05:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The 'trivial' information is to give a better input not just into the album that was produced, but the album as it was being made. As such information as atrists approached, gives people an idea of the direction, and scope of what the band had in mind when making the album, and also an idea as to where they're heading with the next album. You personally, may concider it trivial... but not everyone will. Wikipedia is here to form a place for all information of specific subjects and articles for people to have access to. Anyone who may not be familiar, for example, with Apocalyptica, and are trying to find out what they can, the more information they have the more useful it is to them. That's the purpose of the site... to collate all information into one specific place. Merge what you want of the trivia into the main article, but don't erase it. It's not your information to erase. It's been put there for a reason. It's all sourced, and relevant, there's no need to erase it! Alinblack (talk) 23:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Alinblack, Wikipedia is not here to collate all information into one specific place. The content on the Wiki is here for everyone to edit as they see fit, and removal of content is in actuality one of the best ways to improve an article. The section on who was approached is poorly sourced. The two references provided don't state anything about Björk or Maynard James Keenan, or who will appear on the next album. That information absolutely has to be removed per WP:BLP concerns. All together, there was nothing wrong with MDD4696's merge, it kept the most relevant information on this album and removed the poorly sourced content. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 02:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of which, an encyclopedia with no information is completely useless. Trivia sections are discouraged because they are inherently impertinent. As for WP:BLP, there is no contentious information in the article that I see, so remove-with-prejudice does not apply. Yes, the relevant information needs to be merged. This is a common-sense approach. But what's happening here are two editors determined to have their versions of the page stick. So here's the deal: start merging information and then decide if the other information is worth keeping and where to put it (i.e. not in a trivia section). All-or-nothing bickering won't solve anything. I understand that you like putting a big edit in and changing an article for the better, but little by little makes things so much more precise. Move obviously-relevant information first and then work on the rest. Deletionism improves Wikipedia as much as information-hoarding does. --Anon 81.51.234.87 (talk) 21:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

First of all the information about artists approached was originally from an issue of Kerrang! magazine... and wikipedia only sources from web pages, not physical ones. The information was originally sourced from an interview with the band, but wasn't published online, so the sources had been taken from where they could be found to authenticate the information. Removal of information isn't 'the best way' to improve an article. As long as the information is accurate and is in relative to the article in question then it's up to the individual to decide. Removing inaccurate or fictional information, or even blatant vandalism improves and article is fine. The part about artists approached gives an insite into the history of the recording of the album, such as the track that was recorded with the vocalist of Gojira... it was dropped from the album because the and were unhappy about it in the end. It shows the development of the album, rather than just the finished product. Alinblack (talk) 18:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia accepts physical references, I'm not sure why you think otherwise. See WP:CIT for the different templates, magazine fall under periodicals. You find the right issue # and all that, there's no problem. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 19:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately I no longer have the magazine with the article. It was before I started adding to wikipedia, otherwise I'd have saved it, which is why I scoured the web for sources to source the material. And the reason I thought digital sources were allowed only, was because I'd updated an article and it kept gettin removed as I'd again taken the information from a magazine, but was told by the user that kept removing it that Wiki only accepted verified web sources.Alinblack (talk) 20:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Said user apparently hasn't read WP:V. Print sources are perfectly fine (and are more often considered good sources than web sources because of WP:V). --Anon 81.51.234.87 (talk) 21:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC)