Talk:Laibach

message: Clearly, Tasic's additions drew heavily on Laibach's VH1 biography, but were not credited in the article to that source. I am adding that citation. Someone else may want to judge whether it drew so heavily on that site as to raise copyright issues. These were Tasic's only contributions to Wikipedia. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:15, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)
Sources need to be cited on the "drug addicts" comment, potentially libelous.  (see Controversy placement)--68.63.162.93 (talk) 04:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cite sources

message: I'm a huge Rammstein and Laibach fan and I don't hear much influence between the two. Also, this is the only place I've read that Rammstein was influenced by them. Can anyone provide any other reference to this? If not I think I'm going to remove it. - DNewhall
* I'm with you. I say remove it. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:29, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
:Disagreed. The influences from Laibach are obvious, from the usage of symbols to the musical approach. Compare Laibach's metal releases to Rammstein's. Compare the symbolism. It is commonly noticed by Laibach fans and deserves a place in this article.
:Laibach have even responded to this themselves: 
:"D: Laibach can’t seem to get Wat reviewed without silly comparisons to Rammstein. I’ve seen lots of arguments about Rammstein stealing elements from Laibach in the past, mostly concerning vocal style and even logo design. I’m curious of your reaction to this.
:L: Laibach does not believe in originality and we don’t consider ourselves as sole authors and owners of our own ideas. Therefore, Rammstein could not “steal” much from us. They simply let themselves get inspired by our work, which is absolutely a legitimate process. We are glad that they made it. In a way, they have proven once again that a good “copy” can make more money on the market than the “original.” Anyhow, today we share the territory: Rammstein seem to be a kind of Laibach for adolescents and Laibach are Rammstein for “grown-ups.”"
:So, basically, a simple google search would have ended this debate. --:bloodofox: 03:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While what you are saying may be true, your own admission of "reading between the lines" makes it opinion and original research. --dashiellx (talk) 14:23, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The suggestion that Laibach holds in high regard Rammstein's work is not neutral. The article should just point out that Rammstein was influenced by Laibach. Period.--Rivet138 (talk) 19:46, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Friedemann's singing style is identical to Laibach. Laibach came first. Rammstein also uses Laibach's cross. It is not hard to see the influence. 184.155.130.147 (talk) 02:35, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Rammstein influenced by Laibach?

message: Why link the individual band members' names? Do any of them have fame outside of Laibach? Given Laibach's own opposition to taking individual credit for work, this seems particularly odd. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlinking 

message: I think that you should mention the major influence of Bertrand Burgalat for their work in the eighties. He is really the one who made their classic sound for "Sympathy for the Devil" and "Let it be".
Vberger 11:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article you've linked to simply mentions Laibach in a long list of bands. Do you have something more substantive to suggest as a reference? - Jmabel | Talk 21:27, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

text: * The link has changed (from fr: to en:) since I made this remark. - Jmabel | Talk 00:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So... if you have something substantive (and citable) to say, add it to the article! - Jmabel | Talk 00:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bertrand Burgalat 

message: i'm adding an imdb link to the latest documentary on laibach. haven't seen it yet, so any additional info would be appreciated.213.172.254.20 02:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Divided States of America

message: Should the controversy section really be the very first thing in this article?  I think there is more relevantg information about the band that should come prior to that.Kittynboi 14:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy placement

message: As mentioned in the revert reasoning, the write-up you added, while containing good information, also contains:
*basically no citations
*WP:POV / WP:WEASEL / non-encyclopedic writing
*mis-wiki-linking (like to web sites)
Please consider honing this large addition in your own sandbox and getting feedback from other editors prior to adding it. Thanks. Quaeler (talk) 15:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Much like any encyclopedia, you must have your long historical run-down backed by reference. Also, seriously: read the above WP links; read WP:OR; sign your discussion page edits; cite copyrights for the images you've uploaded; and please don't re-add your un-referenced thesis until you've complied with those. Lastly, avoid deleting relevant good material when you make edits in general (like the Japanese language article link). Thanks. Quaeler (talk) 22:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

text: This was a citation from a link I gave. What if I remove those lines? As a fan I'm trying to gave some better information from reliable sources and links. Will you help me?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zare2 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello and thanks for writing. I've asked for outside mediation to clarify whether it is ok to basically put the verbiage of an act's booking agent as article text (I have questions as to where this treads with respect to point-of-view, promotional issues, etc — i honestly have no idea). Beyond that, you're adding such a massive amount of content which is also breaking references (for example, scroll down to the references part of the article here) that i think it would be a lot more sane were you to make a version of the article in your sandbox and then have editors review it there before transplanting it here. In the meantime, it seems like it would be best to wait until mediation or other editors chimed in here. Thanks - Quaeler (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Also, for the time being I'm declining to edit protect the article. Regardless of the suitability of Zare's edits, they do appear to be made in good faith and I see no reason to protect a page that isn't being abused maliciously. Trusilver 04:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zare2/Zare* edits 

message: I think the compilation CD "An Anthology of Noise and Electronic Music, Vol. 2" should be added to the discography because there is the Laibach piece "Industrial Ambients" which is unreleased elsewhere. However, I don't know how to add it because there is no section for compilations in the discography. What do you think?
Roope (talk) 22:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you think is is appropriate, go ahead and add a section.  --dashiellx (talk) 11:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Check out the Blutengel page for a format suggestion.  --dashiellx (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the suggestion! I added the section. There probably are also other compilations that could be added to that section. Roope (talk) 23:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Industrial Ambients 

message: I did not check them all, but for sure, 300.000 K.V. gets redirected to Laibach. It is their side project, but it is a side project. It has it's own context, feel and musical style. Along with this redirect, is no mention or information really on this side project. Nor is the 300.000 K.V. Discography listed. I am not a writer, and I am far from the authoritarian on this group, but it deserves it's own page.
Collision-Shift (talk) 21:36, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirections 

message: I think there should be a history of Laibach in the beginning of the article. But who would write it? At the moment there is something about the history in the different sections of the article.
The "members" section of the infobox is a bit problematic. At the moment five members are mentioned: Fras, Eber, Saliger, Dachauer, Keller. I think there should be either just the four fictional "official" member or there should be whoever is in the current performing lineup of Laibach. One more possibility might be that there were only Milan Fras and Ivan Novak.
Roope (talk) 14:18, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some problems 

message: Being tired of the many ignorant things Wikipedia editors write, I haven't taken time to establish when the city of Laibach (Lubljana) was first referred to as Laibach, but it clearly wasn't WW II as this article implies.  Ljubljana had been part of Austria for centuries, probably since the city was founded.  The city's name had nothing to do with WW II.  In fact Slovenia had a large German population (Laibach probably also did).  That is why it was called Laibach.  Because it belonged to Austria (of the Austro-Hungarian empire), whose dominant language was German.
I wanted to write something about that, so I'll do it here. Laibach is indeed a historical name of the town, used since the town was established in the middle ages. Please check the page of Ljubljana on Wiki. If you check the middle ages chapter you will see that when it was first mentioned in 12th century, its name was written Leibach. That is not to say that the Slovenian name (Ljubljana) is not old too, but it's to prove that the German name isn't from yesterday either. About this article, something should be done about the chapter Aesthetics, ... in which it's written that the name Laibach was briefly (!) used during WW II (end of 2nd paragraph).--Borutix1 (talk) 22:23, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that the city was refered to as Ljubljana by the government of Kingdom of Yugoslavia.  During the German Occupation during WWII, the Nazi's changed the name to Laibach in their official government documents, etc... due to it being the historical German name. Some German media sources still refer to the city as Laibach to this day, even thought the city residence and the Slovinean government call it Ljubljana.  --dashiellx (talk) 14:49, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: In general you're right. It's just that saying that the name was used during WW2 sort of misses the point, that it was used for centuries (as is true for the Slovenian "Ljubljana"). On the other hand, considering haw the band is using Nazi symbolism, the fact about Nazis using the name Laibach is relavant. I just think it should be stressed that it is (as you've said yourself) a historic name (and not just made up or something by Nazis).--Borutix1 (talk) 17:49, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Laibach 

message: What is the version of Tico Tico used by Laibach in concerts as interlude? It's also heard on Ljubljana-Zagreb-Beograd album as Tito-Tito and could be heard also here (at 34'15").
87.95.16.36 (talk) 01:25, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3Q3v8gkRKQ  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.33.175.132 (talk) 13:45, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  tico tico 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Laibach (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150718073348/http://koryogroup.com/travel_Itinerary_2015_laibach_tour.php to http://koryogroup.com/travel_Itinerary_2015_laibach_tour.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091127175726/http://www.laibach.nsk.si/volk.htm to http://www.laibach.nsk.si/volk.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091128180539/http://www.laibach.nsk.si/volkswagner/ to http://www.laibach.nsk.si/volkswagner/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090129075630/http://morbidangel.com/laibach.html to http://www.morbidangel.com/laibach.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091126001643/http://www.laibach.nsk.si/rec.htm to http://www.laibach.nsk.si/rec.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312073938/http://www.artmargins.com/content/review/griffin.html to http://www.artmargins.com/content/review/griffin.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091014112748/http://www.nskstate.com/laibach/reviews/laibachkunstderfuge.php to http://www.nskstate.com/laibach/reviews/laibachkunstderfuge.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304090232/http://www.letsceefilmfestival.com/film-detail2015/items/ivo_salinger_und_elk_eber_victory_under.html?lang=en to http://www.letsceefilmfestival.com/film-detail2015/items/ivo_salinger_und_elk_eber_victory_under.html?lang=en
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:56, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Laibach (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051230181832/http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=10461 to http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=10461
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Mentioned among Side Projects, but not otherwise glossed, this mysterious title (which alludes to  Sturm und Drang) I would imagine to be a collaboration between Laibach and Kraftwerk. Any information, folks? Nuttyskin (talk) 05:11, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sturm und Klang