Talk:Tool (band)/Archive 2

message: Seem to recall something about someone in the band working on the CG for independence day during their legal tribbles.  Might have been subterfuge or chaffe, of course.  No mention of it in the article currently. -Ozzyslovechild 01:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independence Day 

message: 02:47, 11 January 2006 71.143.113.16 (?Trivia)
	
04:06, 11 January 2006 Hellboy1975 m (rv CS reference. Is it really relevant, or just link spam? discuss)
	
I just added it there cause i interpret trivia as a little, "Did you know" column.	
:It just seemed to me as though it really didn't have much to do with Tool as such. I mean if that goes up there then anyone who's name a server, dog, cat or whatever after Tool will be wanting stuff there. hellboy 06:08, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Imho, it does not belong into the article. The article should be about Tool or things very closely related to Tool. These servers don't have anything to do with Tool besides that their maintainer seems to be a Tool fan therefore I approve of the removal. The Trivia section should stick to trivia surrounding Tool... interpret it as a "Did you know this about Tool?" Otherwise it would definitely get crowded pretty soon..--Johnnyw 11:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the trivia removal 

message: Creating a new article called the 4th album is going a little bit too far isn't it? hellboy 23:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the article The 4th Album to Aldaraia. I just found out at Absolutepunk.net that it would be the title. Mike Garcia 03:53, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh my GOD. This again??--Cassius987 17:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, I guess it's probably not a hoax, just the single's "release date" and the "preview", but you never know with that band68.238.131.138 21:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 4th Album 

message: tour dates have absolutely nothing to do in an encyclopedia. fans should check them on related websites. please remove them. Unixer 19:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I do not know the guideline proposing this, I removed the dates. I agree, that in retrospective, tours should just be summarized. Maybe it's a bit too much listing them all.. the link will probably do fine. --Johnnyw 19:38, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with not having tour dates, if they must be included then I'd recommend a separate page.  The Tool article is long enough without having hundreds of dates on it.  Perhaps a new article covering Tool tours could be created, including dates, locations, support acts, guests etc. hellboy 01:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ummm, no :-) Unixer 13:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Care to elaborate on "ummm, no"? hellboy 01:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that essentially, fans should just look up dates themselves. All we need to provide is an external linkage. We can summarize and describe tours, but there is no need to list dates.--Cassius987 17:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not?  Isn't our goal to be some bastion of comprehensive knowledge? Dimwell 01:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  tour dates 

message: Isn't "Name Etymology" redundant? I think "Etymology" by itself worked. But that's just me, any thoughts?--Cassius987 20:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought so too. "Name derivation" would be fine, or just etymology. I never knew there could be any etymology but name etymology... Johnnyw 12:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Name Etymology

message: Thanks to the new (really funny) promo pics, we have a new image for the infobox. There are some more  and I would like to change the current one - which is a good one - to 02 of the ones linked above, which I believe is superfantasticgigantanormous. Who is with me?? ^^ --Johnnyw 12:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I am going to change the image on my own account, if someone objects, please revert or discuss here. --Johnnyw 13:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Edit: hm, I can't seem to find an original source of any press kit images on the web. The source provided at the new image does not contain the image, it's merely the link to BMG Sony Music's Tool page, which does not hold any press kits. There ARE some press kits available as far as I can see, but these are password protected for journalists only. Since the new image does not contain a source, I probably have to nominate it for deletion, unless we find a source... =( --Johnnyw 15:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I might have jumped the gun here. Since the old one did not contain source either, I uploaded a different (old) promo image as a temporary solution. --Johnnyw 01:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Band image

message: Laterus was No. #16 on the UK albums charts by the way.—This unsigned comment was added by 195.137.109.177 (talk • contribs) .
:Lateralus may have hit #16 in the UK charts - do you have any sources? 66.241.95.65 04:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Laterus

message: There is more information on 10,000 Days available that seems to be missing from this article. For example, "The new Tool single, 'Vicarious' will officially be heard on radio on April 17th." was posted on the official TOOL website on April 1. There was also a tracklisting for 10,000 days posted on the official band website several weeks ago. Considering the album comes out in a month, it seems like there should be more information about it incorporated into the article. Braincandle 18:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You sadly witnessed an act of vandalism. One entire section of the article dedicated to current events and released was removed by a vandal. I restored the previous version, i believe this will be what you expected of the article ^^ --Johnnyw 19:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Ah, I see. Keep up the good work. Braincandle 06:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

text: If read about it yeah. It will only be included if we can find reliable source, since we are not allowed to do original research. And I will probably wait to listen to the entire album. I am not a big fan of singles releases.. although I admit that it's hard to restrain myself from looking for Vicarious. --Johnnyw 11:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

text: No need to restrain yourself--its out there, and boy is it ever good. Braincandle 05:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The album leaked to the internet this afternoon. Braincandle 21:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source? --Johnnyw 00:26, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 10,000 Days

message: Given that each member of the band have quite good individual pages, is it really neccessary to outline all of the side projects in this Tool page?  I'm mean they're really related to the individual not the band.  Perhaps a brief summary and a link to the members pages could be used?  hellboy 00:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Side Projects 

message: Tool often promotes the exploration of writers, scientists and philosophers. Fans speculate whether or not this promotion is an effort by the band to endorse these individuals or to promote objective, critical thinking among their listeners. Tool also seems to promote research into certain aspects of magick including the language Enochian. As Tool is fond of red herrings and rarely comment on such matters, it is unknown whether any members of Tool actually subscribe to such beliefs. Among their many offerings are Timothy Leary, Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, Albert Hoffman, Aleister Crowley, Terrence McKenna and Drunvalo Melchizedek .
I removed this addition made by User:69.138.98.12 since it is unsourced and - in part - covered through the reading list link. Does anyone have some sources regarding this? --Johnnyw 02:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't even think there's a need to look for sources. We don't need this. There's no need to spoonfeed people every possible half-idea Tool have ever mentioned. By the way Johnny, plenty of good edits as usual! Keep up the great work.--Cassius987 19:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  rm exploration of writers, scientists and philosophers 

message: "is as far removed from what's considered musically popular these days as you can get."
In turn, the "list of bands that have been inspired by [Tool] is long and prestigious."
Entries like the above, even as cited with source, are still too point-of-view to be properly encyclopedic for an article. Wikipedia articles should be informational, and posit concrete data on the subject, not consist of commentary that would represent a favorable abstractly given jot of info to appeal to the sensibilities of a fans opinion. 67.5.158.239 05:31, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate your concerns. To substantiate your claim that these citations are not neutral POV, it would have been nice to prove the article wrong and cite a different POV. Of course, you might nevertheless be right. I will try to do a little research and look into both claims asap. --Johnnyw 11:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Well I have been on the lookout for a different description of Tool's Lateralus-era music, looking through the reviews listed at the Lateralus article, but those that I find that are a little longer than just a one-sentence-summary basically do not contradict the statement above. E.g. Q4Music writes "The quartet's almost avant garde approach is light years removed from even that genre's skewed idea of commercialism" , PopMatters writes even more enthusiastically "Tool are the ultimate rock band. They sound cool enough for causal fans while still remaining smart enough for critics." , Rolling Stone "In another era, Lateralus - co-produced by Tool and engineer David Bottrill - would have been considered progressive rock, ten tons of impressive pretension." . So what am I to do? Although there is at least the Q4music quote which backs up the current citation, PopMatters seems to contradict. I will go ahead and replace the current quotation with the last one by the Rolling Stone Magazine, since it goes more into detail about Tool's style during the Lateralus-era, as I originally intended the end of the introductory paragraph to be. Hope you all approve. Regarding the second quote about the influences.. I am not sure if I can find any source contradicting this. If anyone can, please post it here and we will rework the statement. Until then, I will probably not change it.. --Johnnyw 20:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: But why does the intro contain so many quotes and outbound links? Stylistically, the whole section is messy and uneven. (First paragraph reads like something out of a music journal: "proved to be a stroke of luck", etc.) Try writing a totally quote-free version. Worth a try. 195.148.74.159 09:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is basically due to the fact that this would otherwise result in reverting and chaning since the intro would be unverifiable. But I see that the intro isnt easier to read because of the external links. The first step that I will take is to transform the external links into notes. I really would not appreciate if we removed all the verifiable content and replace it with my 2 cents on Tool. BUT, we could do this, if I moved all the content to a new section "Overview" or similar and then write a new intro w/o all the quotes. The overview would then present the facts in detail, including external links and such and the intro would only summarize this overview. But like I said, first of all, I will probably go ahead and change the style to make it more appealing to the eye. Btw: are you the same person who wrote the first comment? If so, did you ever think about creating a WP account? Makes it easier to respond if I know that I am communicating with 1 not 2 people ^^ --Johnnyw 14:32, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, not the same guy. Just a Tool fan who'd like the article to look a bit better. BTW, I think the work you and a few other people have been doing has pushed the entry in the right direction! I guess the main problem is that Tool is a) contemporary and b) active. There isn't a final word that can summed up and reported. But we can still present a set of basic facts. And maybe basic facts are enough (e.g. I personally find the whole genre argument stuff too detailed - just mention the main influences and the band's stance on their sound and you're set). Your plan re: notes sounds good. 81.197.127.187 16:30, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate your input and heads up ^^ I'd still welcome you to create an account and to revisit the article once in a while, and drop a line of criticism. We are always looking for people who give us some creative feedback. I will make the changes pretty soon, although I am always quite busy. Regarding the genre section: I have thought about the issue as well.. I think the way we handle the genre issue in the intro is quite satisfactory, we had a lot of trouble there some months ago. The new section was another result of those troubles. Maybe we could condense this section a bit, although I would like Cassius987 to do so, since that section is his brain child, and he probably has done more research regarding this subject than me or others... --Johnnyw 17:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV & unencyclopedic 

message: There have been widespread rumors circulating on the internet concerning the validity of the 10,000 Days leak.  Fans cite the lack of flow and focus in the album, back to back segues (Lipan Conjuring and Lost Keys) of as well as the seeming similarities between riffs in the new album and previous albums.  It should be noted that, Blair, of Tool's online newsletter, wrote the following in September of 2005,
:"Now where was I?.. Oh yeah, TOOL!.. I'm not going to reveal my source, Mister Patience, but do you want to know the kind of things that have been going on while this record was being recorded? Okay, first there was the decoy record just to confound all those would-be bootleggers out there. This took, oh, about a year, just because the band members wanted it to sound pretty close to the real thing (so as to be believable), along with equally believable art design."
This also follows the pattern of a fan base when reacting negatively to such an influential and popular band as Tool releasing a new album to have the propensity to create false stories and information in hopes that the album they haven't fully adjusted to is some elaborate joke created by the band.
I removed the above paragraphs, since they really did not any substantial or interesting information. Some doubt the album's authenticity, some don't. We'll all find out on April 28, when the album will be released in Europe. The above paragraphs will have lost their informational value by that date anyway. --Johnnyw 19:20, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed speculation from article 

message: I thought this list was pretty pointless.  Far too much point of view and nothing even remotely resembling citations, etc.  Removed.  Feel free to object below.  hellboy 06:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I'm on that, if we do need a list, then it should be short and concise, and not just include every 90s grunge and nu-metal band who happened to record a CD.  Personally I felt the only artist there I'd consider to be similar are The Melvins and King Crimson. hellboy 06:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please let us not endeavour in creating another useless list. People who are interested in similiar artists have the possibility of checking out the artists they have collaborated with, or read some of the album reviews. A list of some sort compiled by us will only result in reverting and endless debates... Btw the article is long enough already.. --Johnnyw 08:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similar Artists 

message: ===Intro Para===
This seems to be in pretty bad shape. Could it be made more concise? Plus, imho the first thing in the article should be a few sentences describing the band in broad terms, rather than details of how they formed.  This should probably be moved to history section.
Also, is it just me, or does the end of this paragraph make no sense at all:
They have gained appreciation and critical praise for a complex and ever-evolving sound, that ranges from "slam and bang" heavy metal on their first release[2] to more progressive influenced songwriting on Lateralus (2001) which "in another era [...] would have been considered progressive rock, ten tons of impressive pretension."[3] 
Could we just cut that out?
If there are no objections, I'd like to make these alterations. JMalky 15:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate any input. :) But I'd also propose to post these alterations here before changing the article so we could incorporate creative feedback from other regular authors of the article as well. --Johnnyw talk 11:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Alternative metal describes Tool. Alternative rock describes those other bands you mentioned. There is a big difference, and any readers who don't notice probably don't care for either genre. Pomte 01:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Dale from the Melvins definitely has, and I'm pretty sure some one of the guys from KC has at some point.  Can't say when though.  I reckon John Stanier from Tomahawk has joined them too. hellboy 05:35, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Another one: Zack de la Rocha (sp?) from Rage Against the Machine performed the Rollins spoken bit in "Bottom" at the Lollapalooza '93 second stage show somewhere in the Detroit area.  I was there (it was very intensely performed, btw, as you might expect). He may have done it at other shows as well.
Mike Bordin (Faith No More and Ozzy) played some kind of percussion during Triad when I saw them at Ozzfest UK in 2002.  I won't add it into the article yet though.  I'll let someone more experienced do it ;-)  Aenimiac 15:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your contribution! Please excuse this late response.. one of us frequent editors will probably get to it this week. Do you know by any chance sources regarding these appearences? I am a little concerned regarding verifiability.. As soon as I incorporate your corrections I'll try to find some my own. Sadly I didn't have the time to do so yet, since I dedicated most of my time recently to other sections.. --Johnnyw 01:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sources?  Aside from copies of those shows in my CD collection?  Check the Tool trading community (esp. collectiveunconscious.org and distortiononline.com) for source info.  --Dimwell 23:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I assume dropping by your place and looking the guests up in your cd collection would fall under original research ;) but the sites will probably do just fine, thx. To be honest, I've already looked them up myself but refrained from comparing the lists, since I couldn't find a simple list of guest appearences and did not have the time to look through every single concert. I was kinda tangled up in saving the 10,000 days article, swatting dubious images w/o copyright tags like flies.. --Johnnyw 12:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Sober.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYFuhpv9U6U
I moved the Guest Appearances to Tool tours#Guest musicians. Still needs sourcing. --Hobbes747 00:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Open Tasks

message: This seems to be in pretty bad shape. Could it be made more concise? Plus, imho the first thing in the article should be a few sentences describing the band in broad terms, rather than details of how they formed.  This should probably be moved to history section.
Also, is it just me, or does the end of this paragraph make no sense at all:
They have gained appreciation and critical praise for a complex and ever-evolving sound, that ranges from "slam and bang" heavy metal on their first release[2] to more progressive influenced songwriting on Lateralus (2001) which "in another era [...] would have been considered progressive rock, ten tons of impressive pretension."[3] 
Could we just cut that out?
If there are no objections, I'd like to make these alterations. JMalky 15:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate any input. :) But I'd also propose to post these alterations here before changing the article so we could incorporate creative feedback from other regular authors of the article as well. --Johnnyw talk 11:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Alternative metal describes Tool. Alternative rock describes those other bands you mentioned. There is a big difference, and any readers who don't notice probably don't care for either genre. Pomte 01:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro Para

message: Can anyone confirm that Adrian Belew or any of the other KC members have joined Tool on stage?
Also, can anyone think of AND CONFIRM anyone not already listed?
:Dale from the Melvins definitely has, and I'm pretty sure some one of the guys from KC has at some point.  Can't say when though.  I reckon John Stanier from Tomahawk has joined them too. hellboy 05:35, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Another one: Zack de la Rocha (sp?) from Rage Against the Machine performed the Rollins spoken bit in "Bottom" at the Lollapalooza '93 second stage show somewhere in the Detroit area.  I was there (it was very intensely performed, btw, as you might expect). He may have done it at other shows as well.
Mike Bordin (Faith No More and Ozzy) played some kind of percussion during Triad when I saw them at Ozzfest UK in 2002.  I won't add it into the article yet though.  I'll let someone more experienced do it ;-)  Aenimiac 15:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your contribution! Please excuse this late response.. one of us frequent editors will probably get to it this week. Do you know by any chance sources regarding these appearences? I am a little concerned regarding verifiability.. As soon as I incorporate your corrections I'll try to find some my own. Sadly I didn't have the time to do so yet, since I dedicated most of my time recently to other sections.. --Johnnyw 01:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sources?  Aside from copies of those shows in my CD collection?  Check the Tool trading community (esp. collectiveunconscious.org and distortiononline.com) for source info.  --Dimwell 23:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I assume dropping by your place and looking the guests up in your cd collection would fall under original research ;) but the sites will probably do just fine, thx. To be honest, I've already looked them up myself but refrained from comparing the lists, since I couldn't find a simple list of guest appearences and did not have the time to look through every single concert. I was kinda tangled up in saving the 10,000 days article, swatting dubious images w/o copyright tags like flies.. --Johnnyw 12:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Sober.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYFuhpv9U6U
I moved the Guest Appearances to Tool tours#Guest musicians. Still needs sourcing. --Hobbes747 00:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Live guests

message: Hi folks, I have a proposal to make. I would like to create a new section in the article, an "overview", preceeding the history section. This overview could merge a bit of the content of other sections, maybe shorten the intro just a bit. Here are some specific thoughts on this:
* some of the collaborations with other artists are quite significant and might be interesting to the casual reader who does not want work over the entire article, e.g. the songs recorded with RATM, Carey's tabla work - perfect info summarized in an overview,
* some of the descriptions on the sound of Tool in the intro are redundant, since we have 4-5, maybe we could move the beginning of the 2nd paragraph (part of the sound description and the hint to the arguments about their genre) to the overview and rewrite it a bit to elaborate a tiny bit more on Tool's visual art, which would lead me to my second suggestion:
* the overview could finally sport a summary about Tool's visual art, which is quite a subject. In order to prevent the article from growing ever larger, it would sport a link to an article dedicated to the subject. We have been putting this off for some time now, sadly.
I've come up with a very rough proposal.. after reading Wikipedia:Subpages, I decided to create subpage to use as a place for drafting and working on the article until it is ready: Talk:Tool (band)/Overview Of course, this would require your support, help and initiative. I am looking forward for a lively discussion on this matter.. what do you think? --Johnnyw 19:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume you're talking about the 10,000 Day's puzzle reference.  If that's the case, considering it's so vague, I don't see any reason why it should be included in Wikipedia hellboy 03:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough.  Diogenes Blinks 15:13, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

text: If/when this data is added, it should appear on the Album page, not the Tool page. hellboy 23:38, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: Overview and Visual art 

message: Recently I was browsing the hmv UK website (http://www.hmv.co.uk/hmvweb/displayProductDetails.do?ctx=280;-1;-1;-1&sku=508767) and found Salival for £8.99. I ordered it on Monday 15th May, since then the price has gone up. I'm confused by it being on especially as it's release date is 15th June 2006. I waiting for the delivery, it should come tomorrow. I've got the email reciept and the money has gone from my account but still i'm thinking that it isn't an original or thery're going to send me some other CD. Does anyone know if it is still avaliable or if it has been rereleased?
advo 09:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, it's a limited release w/o any chance of rerelease. The item you linked above also states "Availability: sorry this title is deleted".. it's probably a mistake. Also, IF you receive anything other then a copy, it will probably just the CD, not the VHS or DVD version which included all the music videos up to that date. Nevertheless, it's a good buy, I enjoyed Salival very much =) --Johnnyw 14:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Salival Rerelease?

message: Is "Die Eier Von Satan" actually a popular Tool song? Methinks "Parabola" would be a better choice for the list, especially since "Eier" isn't really a "song." King Bee 14:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are certainly right. Problem is, that there is no article for "Parabola (song)". It'd be welcome if you created the article, and maybe merged Parabola (DVD) into the new article, just like it has been done with Schism (song) and Schism (DVD)... --Johnnyw 00:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call. I think I'll do that, as soon as I have a couple of hours free. Thanks for the suggestion. I would like to know, however, how to change the "popular song" thing at the bottom of the page. I'm not exactly sure what's going on there. King Bee 12:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, that's an easy one: Template:Toolband is a template that can be included in Tool-related articles and centrally modified. See Wikipedia:Template namespace for further information. This means, that after creating the article, you just have to edit the Toolband-template like you'd edit an article and replace "Die Eier von Satan" with "Parabola" (using normal wiki-syntax for links etc.) - this change will appear everywhere where the toolband-template is included. --Johnnyw 14:53, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sweet! Thanks for the info and the help. King Bee 12:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're very welcome. =) --Johnnyw 15:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular songs

message: I removed this paragraph, since it is quite speculative. --Johnnyw talk 19:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  etymology: removed paragraph 

message: In the new Blender I noticed that Tool is "stressed over their Wikipedia article"... which is actually sad and pathetic to say the least for us pedians. The blip says as follows:
"The band's Wikipedia page states that Keenan met Tool guitarist Adam Jones through Rage Against the Machine shredder Tom Morello. 'That is untrue,' says Jones, who went to high school with Morello in Libertyville, Illinois. 'We played together in a band called the Electric Sheep. We were terrible.'"
This isn't really my article, and I don't know how anybody wants to put it, so I'll leave it up to the everybody else. willsy 19:19 July 12th 2006.
:Well to put it bluntly, if Adam, Danny, Justin or Maynard have a problem with the article then, like all of us, they could feel free to make the changes! hellboy 00:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And to be honest, I don't know where they got that info from?! The article reads "It was Tom Morello, a high school friend of Jones, who introduced Carey to the band in 1990 and eventually helped the formation of Tool." .. Which is basically exactly what Jones said... Probably a mistake done by Blender then, sharp to find "another" error in WP? Just my 2 cents.. May I ask the exact source of that statement? Maybe there is a chance to clarify this. --Johnnyw talk 00:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I scoured a little bit through the article history up to October of last year - if it ever said s.th., it must have been a loooong time ago. So what the hell. --Johnnyw talk 09:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

text: No need to apologize. Thanks for pointing it out, man. Too bad the magazine didn't even bother to do research.--Johnnyw talk 00:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool in Blender 

message: Are you kidding? I know nothing of Bulgarian folk metal, and I live in Bulgaria. The closest thing to it is pop-folk, which is crap, and it isn't originally Bulgarian anyway. So, what is this Bulgarian thing?
--84.43.145.225 10:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bulgarian Folk Metal?