Talk:Megadeth/Archive 1

message: Uh, in the article it states that the name Megadeth is a "Play on the army's term for megadeath, which means 1,000,000 deaths." It's not a pun, someone messed up when writing the band's name on a marquee when they were just starting, afaik. Can someone edit this if they can?
: Dave Mustaine: Megadeth represents the annihilation of power. We spell the name phonetically because the meaning to us is the same you get out of the dictionary-it's a hypothetical body count after a nuclear fallout. It's a million deaths, and we want to leave our audience shell-shocked wherever we go. - http://megadeth.rockmetal.art.pl/interviews_hitparader1987.html --Sus scrofa 04:17, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Megadeth (band name)

message: Jesus, how many fucking times does Metallica have to be mentioned?  Some of it is warranted, ie, Mustaine left Metallica for Megadeth, but is there really any need for further comparisons (example:  Justice for All and Rust in Peace/Countdown and the Black Album)?  This article has been trolled.
    Metallica is mentioned so many times because they are the greatest band to    ever walk the earth. stop your bitching & shut your cock hole.
Well, if that isn't POV, I don't know what is... Thanks for being a prime example of why non-registered users shouldn't be allowed to edit articles. IainP (talk) 12:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metallica 

message: I think somebody need to write about him
Artist 16:12, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a seperate article about Vic Rattlehead somebody could incorporate it into this article. --Sus scrofa 10:41, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vic Rattlehead 

message: To whom it may concern- copy-and-paste between articles is against Wikipedia regulations becuase it discards the edit history, which is a violation of our implementation of GFDL rules. -Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 12:40, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  MegaGOFF 

message: Is Megadeth's entire discography, let alone the videography, really necessary for this page? It takes up a lot of room and in my opinion should be moved to a seperate page. What do other people think? Cheers, Hauser 09:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I've made the same statement on the Iron Maiden page and intend to split that at the start of next month if I get no objections. I'd be more than happy to do the same with this page if nobody has a problem with that? IainP (talk) 10:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also noticed - the Dave Mustaine page has the exact same discography within it (plus two MD45 albums). It would make sense to create one Megadeth Discography and strip this repeated information out of both articles IainP (talk) 09:57, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good work on the change, Iain. I'm surprised it was on there for as long as it was, yet I wasn't wanting to tread on anyone's toes over it. Cheers, Hauser 06:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for that. Just seemed best to set a date and go for it otherwise it would just end up sitting there forever! I also stripped the discog from the Iron Maiden article. Even more necessary as there already was a separate page for it. IainP (talk) 09:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography Necessary? 

message: The cover image for the CD and DVD are the same, so I've linked the DVD cover to the same image. However, for some reason this has been uploaded as "Image:MegadethTheWorldNeedsAHero.jpg" (as opposed to "Megadeth-The World Needs a Hero.jpg" which is the actual one for The World...). I've re-uploaded the image with the correct name and will mark the old image for deletion once I've corrected the links. IainP (talk) 09:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rude Awakening 

message: hey, I added a band infobox. It is missing the former members because there are so many of them, however they are still at the bottom of the page. :)--Rangi 10:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Band infobox 

message: The new logo is an inspiration of fans of Megadeth, when this reformed in (2004). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperador Lord Fenix (talk • contribs) 18:03, 16 May 2006
: But where does it come from? It's not the Vic Rattlehead redesign that won on deviantART; is it your own creation? Fan art? Dave's art? 
: In any case, this article has become very picture heavy, and a lot of those pictures are fair use, not free. The more pictures we include the less convincing our argument for having fair use to each one of those pictures becomes. I'm not going to revert ELF anymore on this, but the one at the very top of the page is against the style guidelines for Wikipedia, and we need to come to some sort of decision about which of the rest need to stay and which should go. -- nae'blis (talk) 23:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Contradicted myself once I looked at the page history. ELF has been reported for WP:3RR violations, which is a shame because he seems to be making contributions otherwise (like possibly single-handedly building the Arsenal of Megadeth page, assuming that's not a copyvio. Is this person a problem child from before? Other users make mention of "Emperor Penix", but I don't get the joke/reference. -- nae'blis (talk) 23:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had POV problems with him when he first started. After a few NPOV warnings on his talk page he lightened up on the deity pushing. He didn't appear to care too much about Wiki-policy. AGF was growing very thin. This page appeared in my VandalProof watchlist window more times than it needed to. A handful of users seem to be in agreement that all the images bog the article down. Most of the better music articles have no more than 3(or 4). Hopefully a concensus  for this article can be found. Cheers! Anger22 23:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can we all agree that this "Machovic Red" image has no place in this article, least of all at the top? I've just had to remove it from an edit done by 208.57.229.34 I can only assume that this is Emperador Lord Fenix. I think this article has to slim down on the images. "Fair use" can only be pushed so far. --Enter The Crypt 01:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New logo "MACHOVIC RED" 

message: It seems that the number of images in this article is becoming contentious. I myself believe that there is too many. It's nice to have a few for illustrative purposes, but there is no need for so many album covers. All the albums are linked to their own Wikipedia pages, where their cover art is shown. The article would be easier on the eye if the number of images was slimmed down. I'm not going to go and remove images now, because I know they would be re-instated. Can somebody who wants to maintain the current quantity of images please make their opinions known here? Thanks. --Enter The Crypt 00:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Concensus appears to be that way already. A certain editors "ownership" of the article has become quite tedious. Hopefully all will balance out soon. 216.21.150.44 12:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images In Article