Talk:Madina Lake

message: Given that the band has used this name on their main website for a while now and that they've made no mention of it ever being changed to another title, and that the album is slated for March 2009, is it safe to assume that Attics to Eden is no longer the working title for the album but the actual name? IndigoAK200 (talk) 12:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, not until there is an official announcement by a reliable source. Ps. New sections should be placed at the bottom of the talk page. k-i-a-c (hitmeup - the past) 13:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  What about the band's own MySpace? Considering this blog is updated by the band members themselves, it seems like a reliable source (even though the domain is blacklisted for whatever reason). They specifically state, "our next record ATTICS TO EDEN is coming out eary 2009."  That sounds like a pretty clear indication that this is the name of the album - unless they're simply going to use the working name for the album until whenever.  But why would they put so much effort into all the marketing materials - website, tour, blog posts, etc that say Attics to Eden if it's not the final name for the album? 
(edit) Actually, here you go - http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/artists/madinalake/index.aspx?newsitemID=19538 - there's an official announcement. :P-IndigoAK200 (talk) 01:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Simple as that haha. I just wrote up a little something then, easy as pie. k-i-a-c (hitmeup - the past) 10:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Attics to Eden

message: :Image:MadinaLakeEP.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 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 03:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:MadinaLakeEP.jpg

message: Happens with every modern band that's ever labled Emo, doesn't it? But Emo in a modern sense is not a genre, it's a fashion, an identifier (far too broad to be a genre) and an insult (whether or not you personally view "Emo" as a bad thing, many use it as an insult), the only definition of "Emo" that is a genre is "Emotional Hardcore" which Madina Lake are definetly not. 62.252.193.217 20:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre *sigh* 

message: Well I don't consider Madina lake to be screamo, but some might, considering that the singer does scream at least once or twice in nearly every song. What do you people think of this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 (talk) 12:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screamo 

message: For what parts of the article are sources needed?
There are no quotes in the article where would i place a source? Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 22:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Almost all of the history is unsourced, save for one paragraph. —C.Fred (talk) 22:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the things that need citing badly are all the dates in the History section .Joedamadman (talk) 23:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I added about 12 different references. Check them all out if you wish. If you need any more just say and i will find them. Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 00:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The first and fifth paragraphs in the 'History' section are the only ones that still really need citations. Joedamadman (talk) 21:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: These keep getting changed. They are quite obviously post hardcore and pop punk, like similar bands. I can see the grunge style in them, even if it's not much it should be included. Why do they keep getting changed? Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 12:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly to sign your posts put 4 tiles,  ~~~~  after you post. Secondly your opinion doesnt matter, WP:RS do. Allmusic state alternative rock, so it will be added in now. I don't mean to be rude by the way lol Jakisbak (talk) 22:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Well im not sure what way the genres should be listed but yeah thats fine with me. I edited the article so leave the genres as this as its the right way to do it. Jakisbak (talk) 17:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Yeah i know but all the genres listed at the moment are subgenres of rock, so rock isn't actually needed. Jakisbak (talk) 13:57, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Rock is a PARENT CATEGORY and if we can get more specific than that is better.  Yes, Madina Lake are rock, but more specifically - they are alternative rock, which is already listed in the genres.  To list Alt Rock and Rock is redundant, because alternative rock is ALREADY rock.  Also, please please please stop changing genres to each song, they are already agreed upon and it is incredibly frustrating having to undo your edits, especially when you list rock music as rock, which doesn't go to the correct page.  So now the rest of us have to fix this time and time again because you can't be bothered to discuss it first. Unugunu (talk) 19:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Theres still no point, we have the subgenres so we dont need the parent genre since the genres are calling them rock, just subgenres, trying to be more specific. Jakisbak (talk) 19:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

text: So long as it is sufficiently well referenced, then go ahead and make an entire section (if you can find enough info for it). An obvious comparison would be to check out Coheed and Cambria and The Amory Wars to see what has been done for a similar "concept" band. Nouse4aname (talk) 08:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah i think it deserves it's own section. Im sure it's well documented, ive seen it everywhere. It is a pretty big part of the band, having songs and albums named after the concept and such. Ive pretty much forgotten the story now, but im sure you can find enough information on the bands website too. Jakisbak (talk) 09:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The band's website wouldn't be the best source however, as per WP:RS, reliable sources should be third-party, ie, those unrelated to the band, for example, a magazine or documentary. Nouse4aname (talk) 10:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:   I have plenty of direct quotes from the band members as well as magazine articles to incorporate.  I'll start putting it together this weekend and then I'll edit it in.  Any preferences on where to place it?  I'm thinking perhaps after "History". Unugunu (talk) 22:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah i think thats the best place to put it before the discography and members section. Jakisbak (talk) 23:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

text: This has already been discussed. They are alternative rock, not emo. Alternative Rock, not screamo. I don't even think they'd fall under emo rock, because they are ALTERNATIVE ROCK. Really, now, just because the message the music gets across is somewhat darker doesn't mean it's emo music. Billybobpeter (talk) 18:18, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

text: My guess would be it's an exclusive itunes bonus track. They wouldn't put a sneak peak at the next album in their previous album's listing, i wouldn't of thought anyway. k-i-a-c (hitmeup - the past) 23:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Yeah it was a b-side from House of Cards (Madina Lake song). k-i-a-c (hitmeup - the past) 23:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genres 

message: these guys are ROCK
not alternative rock. Such bands are Jimmy Eat World Snow patrol Downhere Muse and Sunny day real estate
These are straight up rawk man
they'd say they were a rock band
the music makes it so (combined with pop punk and grunge elements)
they have their own sense of style, but they are not alternative in the sense of the genre
comment signed by loveyourfaith - - - -
:Firstly to sign your posts put 4 tiles,  ~~~~  after you post. Secondly your opinion doesnt matter, WP:RS do. Allmusic state alternative rock, so it will be added in now. I don't mean to be rude by the way lol Jakisbak (talk) 22:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well im not sure what way the genres should be listed but yeah thats fine with me. I edited the article so leave the genres as this as its the right way to do it. Jakisbak (talk) 17:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Yeah i know but all the genres listed at the moment are subgenres of rock, so rock isn't actually needed. Jakisbak (talk) 13:57, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Rock is a PARENT CATEGORY and if we can get more specific than that is better.  Yes, Madina Lake are rock, but more specifically - they are alternative rock, which is already listed in the genres.  To list Alt Rock and Rock is redundant, because alternative rock is ALREADY rock.  Also, please please please stop changing genres to each song, they are already agreed upon and it is incredibly frustrating having to undo your edits, especially when you list rock music as rock, which doesn't go to the correct page.  So now the rest of us have to fix this time and time again because you can't be bothered to discuss it first. Unugunu (talk) 19:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Theres still no point, we have the subgenres so we dont need the parent genre since the genres are calling them rock, just subgenres, trying to be more specific. Jakisbak (talk) 19:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rock 

message: One thing that bothers me about the article is placement of concept.    I believe that the concept of Madina Lake should have it's own section... right now all I have is the tiny bit in the 'formation' section, but I don't like it because it doesn't really have to do with the formation of the band.  I was thinking of either bumping that paragraph up to the top before the sections come in, or making an entire new section and placing it either before or after 'History'.   Or do you think it's fine as is?  I think it can definitely be expanded and it's a pretty big part of the band so I would like it to have more information on it.  Let me know what you think.  Unugunu (talk) 04:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So long as it is sufficiently well referenced, then go ahead and make an entire section (if you can find enough info for it). An obvious comparison would be to check out Coheed and Cambria and The Amory Wars to see what has been done for a similar "concept" band. Nouse4aname (talk) 08:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah i think it deserves it's own section. Im sure it's well documented, ive seen it everywhere. It is a pretty big part of the band, having songs and albums named after the concept and such. Ive pretty much forgotten the story now, but im sure you can find enough information on the bands website too. Jakisbak (talk) 09:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The band's website wouldn't be the best source however, as per WP:RS, reliable sources should be third-party, ie, those unrelated to the band, for example, a magazine or documentary. Nouse4aname (talk) 10:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:   I have plenty of direct quotes from the band members as well as magazine articles to incorporate.  I'll start putting it together this weekend and then I'll edit it in.  Any preferences on where to place it?  I'm thinking perhaps after "History". Unugunu (talk) 22:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah i think thats the best place to put it before the discography and members section. Jakisbak (talk) 23:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concept 

message: obviously the should be called emo they fit the dscripsion perfectly, lyrics and music and if you dont believe check the emo page  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakeellsonator (talk • contribs) 18:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This has already been discussed. They are alternative rock, not emo. Alternative Rock, not screamo. I don't even think they'd fall under emo rock, because they are ALTERNATIVE ROCK. Really, now, just because the message the music gets across is somewhat darker doesn't mean it's emo music. Billybobpeter (talk) 18:18, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  emo 

message: I recently heard this song, and began wondering...
On iTunes, the song "We'll Be Okay" is said to be from "From Us, Through Them, To You", but according to the wikipedia article, "We'll Be Okay" isn't included in the album.
Is this song just an extra added in by Madina Lake, or is it a sneak peek into Attics to Eden...? Billybobpeter (talk) 18:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess would be it's an exclusive itunes bonus track. They wouldn't put a sneak peak at the next album in their previous album's listing, i wouldn't of thought anyway. k-i-a-c (hitmeup - the past) 23:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Yeah it was a b-side from House of Cards (Madina Lake song). k-i-a-c (hitmeup - the past) 23:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  We'll Be Okay 

message: Hi could someone please link the new album to the task bar thing on the bottom i found it already written up at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attics_To_Eden ,thanks Dkins8 (talk) 11:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link the album 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Madina Lake. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081022095240/http://www.soundwavefestival.com:80/artists/?ParentPageID=3&PageID=3 to http://www.soundwavefestival.com/artists/?ParentPageID=3&PageID=3
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100120062811/http://www.piledrivernoise.com:80/2010/01/12/madina-lake-uk-tour/ to http://www.piledrivernoise.com/2010/01/12/madina-lake-uk-tour/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:41, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Madina Lake. 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/20090130143335/http://warpedtour.com/warpedtour/bands.asp to http://warpedtour.com/warpedtour/bands.asp
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) 22:10, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified