Talk:The Bedlam in Goliath

message: : RFT, IT indeed Zopwx2 20:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yes!

message: can someone please quote or cite where it has been reported/claimed that enough of the dvd's are not working that necessitates its inclusion in this article.  A number of discs for every release ever has some sort of problem...if you, as an individual, are experiencing problems, this does not indicate any sort of widespread issues as your text suggests.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srxt81 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Best Buy DVD's

message: NOTE: Despite much talk about the existence of this version, it does exist.  An exploded picture of the full contents is on the way.  It was purchased in a Best Buy store in Paramus, NJ at noon, for a sale price of $9.99.  Whether or not this version is available in Canada has yet to be verified.Srxt81 (talk) 01:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: nothing special about copies of the album sold @ best buy

message: 1 or 2 ? I like the square ones better, but I can't figure out how to add paragraph breaks or wtvr like the the non square one. Plus I want to apply the same format to all the related articles once we decide. Zopwx2 23:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The quote boxes keep things more organized than the quotation marks do, although at first sight it looks weird. Once more info about the album is presented throughout the article, it should start flowing a lot better. Vanishdoom 01:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Why the hell did we get rid of the boxes? The article looks much less sexy now.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.190.63 (talk) 03:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's ridiculous to have all the info regarding an album be told through nothing but interview quotes. Only reason. —Vanishdoom (talk) 03:29, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  hah I expected people to add text inbetween the quotes but wtvr. Zopwx2 (talk) 03:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotey things

message: its out OCT 30th!
:it seems reasonable, but I wouldn't put it in until something citable shows up, just in case. Zopwx2 01:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sources, Sources, Sources ! What's GSL ? That myspace page has nothing of interest on it.  --WaterWolf 11:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where are you getting this October 30th date? Wasn't that the original release before it was ultimately pushed back? Vanishdoom 01:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: everything in this thread is old. Turns out deimos is recorld label and they're releasing the orange album. Not sure what that means for this one or gsl. We'll just have to wait and see.Zopwx2 04:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Release Date & DEIMOS

message: That's gonna get taken down so fast... I've seen that cover floating around, and it looks pretty legit, but I've seen several fake covers that looked just as legit.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.95.248.112 (talk) 19:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah it should be taken down as it's most likely fake, buit someone else would just upload it again, so there's no use in bothering with it until GSL or universal releases the real cover art.68.255.231.104 20:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't fake as it's on their website. (Anonymous)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.155.70 (talk) 20:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 4 September 2007  Zopwx2 (talk) 22:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Album Cover

message: The article states that there is a 15 minutes long track on the album according to a rolling stone review. However, the tracks are all there with track times, and none are 15 or more minuets...which is wrong?202.67.80.65 01:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing is wrong. omar just isn't good with numbers Zopwx2 07:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Goliath was originally Rapid Fire Tollbooth which was originally 15 minutes long. obviously the RS interview was done before the TBiG mix of Goliath/RFT was finalized.65.43.208.170 09:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting Stuff 

message: i pre-ordered a copy of TBIG Today in JB Hi Fi where i was told the release date is the 26th of january (note im from Sydney Australia), has anyone else heard of this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.180.92 (talk) 09:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian release date 

message: Figured it wasn't entirely necessary but I've seen it on countless other album articles so figured it was the appropriate. -Lemike (talk) 03:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  leak 

message: Someone (200.83.82.173) decided to kill 2 bad reviews. I went ahead and posted them back up. People should get to see the good and the bad, don't you think?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadastic (talk • contribs) 03:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad review removal?

message: The time length of this album is 75:52, obviously. When anonymous users were posting that on the album's wikipedia page, I reverted it back to 75:42. So finally, I checked for myself on my personal copy of the album, and sure enough, the album is 75:52, not 75:42, what I originally though it to be. So I apologize to all those anonymous users who were just trying to do the right thing.
BTC 03:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I am here to apologize for past actions. 

message: Is anyone going to mention the remixes that have been coming out recently?
Goliath- El P
Ouroburos- DJ Nobody
Askepios- DJ Nobody
Tourniquet Man- ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.93.142.4 (talk) 07:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-Sides & Remixes 

message: Was this album mixed there?  The source is from the Nardwuar interview in part 1.  They mention that they mixed it there.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.90.179.122 (talk) 08:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a link to the source that you say mentions this? It would be nice to supply one of those. If not a link, then some sort of credible reference that meets the wikipedia guidelines would be nice also. The addition of the source would be needed before there is any investigation on this matter. Thanks for mentioning your inquiry here. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 18:57, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Cool. I have to check that video out sometime. Thanks for the notification. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 03:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixed at Electric Ladyland Studio? 

message: I could be wrong here, but I thought I read somewhere a while ago that when they split up The Soothsayer, it wasn't split in halves, but into seven separate pieces, each one of which was buried alone. Has anyone heard of anything like this?
Geb Mills (talk) 06:44, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, I have not heard of that story. If you can cite that, then feel free to put it on the article, as long as it doesn't have a trivia section created because of it. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 00:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burying the Soothsayer 

message: I'm posting on the talk page to address a recent issue of anonymous editors adding "hard rock" to the genre infobox. It's being continuously re-added even after reversion. I tried finding a source and giving the benefit of the doubt, but the only source I found is blacklisted as spam on Wikipedia for some reason that beats me; therefore, I've found no reliable sources verifying the claim. I tried keeping the term around as per the rationale given by one of the anonymous IPs (concerning the Grammy win), but that was dismissed by a fellow editor due to lack of a source. Therefore, if someone wants to add "hard rock" to the infobox, they should first address and/or view this page to see why adding it without source or explanation is a bad idea. I really hope that this page doesn't become semi-protected over this again. Besides, "hard rock" is a quite vague term anyways. Please end the genre warring. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 20:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The page is semi-protected for two months now, which is a good thing. In light of this, I'll take this page off my watchlist now. If the genre warring resumes after protection, then please notify the requests for page protection page. The genre warring should not have arrived to the point of thrice semi-protection, but it was severe enough for such consequences to be deserved. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 19:46, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This album as "hard rock"