Talk:Death in June

message: I think this is a very misleading topic header. It’s clear that the concert in question was canceled by individual club owners due to appeals by a small but organized and determined group. I think “Banned” is VERY a misleading word because no government action occurred and are no restrictions, legally speaking, against the band playing here in Chicago or Illinois.  
Jeff Vollmer   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.112.32 (talk) 21:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Banned in Chicago

message: 4-5+ footnotes are recommended, as is a paragraph or two for a lead section. Deckiller 01:23, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a few lead paragraphs as recommended. I'm unsure as to how much the foot notes would help, most of the references are found on the internet with a click, which I've attempted to include. :bloodofox: 05:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA status

message: Why keep the link to the "Harvey D. Thornburg"?  It's a page of two-sentence impressions, and only concerning the select albums he'd happened upon!  It's unsubstantial and pointless.  If you feel other people's opinions are that valuable, you might at least link to a semi-professional review site like Allmusic.  Unlike Mr. Thornburg, they've actually heard the Wall of Sacrifice LP.. 
Rfd
:That's a good enough reason for me. Removed. :bloodofox: 04:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: Is it really necessary to describe him as a gay English folk musician, I'm not discounting the factual accuracy of this description, it just seems to me, to be making a massive point.
Further reading of the article covers this anyway. :A.Grace: 12 April 2006
:I agree and I've since edited the article to reflect that. :bloodofox: 18:54, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sexuality

message: LP/EPs: Those titles in which the majority of the material was contemporaneous to their release,
Compilations: Those which consist of previously released material, regardless of 'interpretation', and live recordings.
The titles now listed under 'Compilations', of which DI6 contributed soley a pre-released track, should be disincluded IMO, as they are not nearly as relevant and outside the scope of a general article.  The newly proposed structure seems more suitable for potential readers who desire to distinguish between the *actual* material (in their chronological context) and the surplus of re-organized packages.
I am willing to make these changes.  Renfield 16:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal of New Discographic Structure

message: "both members" would seem to mean there were only two. "sole work" and "various collaborators" seemed at odds. I also combined the mostly redundant second and third sentences. johndburger 04:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awkward first P? 

message: Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 02:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Re-Review and In-line citations 

message: This article is being reviewed at WP:GA/R for possible delisting of its Good article status. Teemu08 21:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: just a little recommendation dude, i've worked on tons of discographies and all the compilation and single articles look like shit. can't do anything about it, i'm working on about 5 other discographies, most are bigger than this one. --AlexOvShaolin 02:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I am working to get the inline citations together as I have time. If anyone wants to do so ahead of me, please do. :bloodofox: 08:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is now done. :bloodofox: 15:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:GA/R|Good article Review]] of GA status 

message: 1) Does anyone else think that the feud between Douglas P. and David Tibet is worth mentioning? Considering the amount of collaboration David has done with Death In June, it's somewhat significant, specially with the "Free Tibet" MP3 release.
2) http://community.livejournal.com/heilige_tod/46779.html The Yahoo! Group message where Douglas P. physically posted this is here: http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/deathinjune/message/31029, but you must be a member. However, the new album should be at least briefly mentioned.
- 75.19.62.38 08:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two things... 

message: If this passes a GAR it will be unusual. The references are limited to only two or three internet sites. One reference no longer works, and one is in French (it could be about anything). Those in-line citations are sorely needed. --andreasegde 16:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The references are mainly interviews which are collected on to a single site as the other zines often go down. I am not sure why that is a problem. Aren't all of the references properly cited? :bloodofox: 21:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's about NPOV. I know it's difficult finding various references, but relying on one or two sites seems to be limited. Are there any newspaper/magazine articles that you could reference? --andreasegde 19:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are all from different articles and publications, they're just all archived on the official website. :bloodofox: (talk) 08:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: I’m sorry, but I’ve had to fail this GA nomination.  The main reason is that the article is very poorly referenced - entire sections have no sources, so it’s very difficult to verify the information within it. Below are some prose related issues with the article aswell, but the main issue is the distinct lack of sourcing. The existing references are also poorly formatted, and should be converted to  or similar. As it’s unlikely the majority of the article can be referenced in one week, I’ve decided to fail the article. Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 01:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the time you've taken to look this over and recommend those specific changes. I agree and I will work to incorporate them to improve the article. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed Good Article nomination

message: :Image:Friends-01.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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Friends-01.jpg

message: Anyone who's followed the Death In June Yahoo group probably knows that there's been a bit of a feud between Douglas P and Albin. This has started to show in the article, as someone from Adelaide Australia keeps changing the article to accuse Albin of plagiarism, etc. Shouldn't the record of their collaboration remain neutral?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warm snack (talk • contribs) 20:35, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feud with Albin Julius 

message: I propose merging Death in June discography into Death in June, comments are welcome.  Dr.pragmatist (talk) 06:07, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose  I just split the discography off from this because it was too big, and I am planning on merging the track listings of all non-notable releases into that new discography. <B>—Torchiest</B> talkedits 13:00, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

text: Oppose Death in June's discography should be in it's own article. The band is one of the most significant artist in the industrial genre. --dashiellx (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Oppose: As Torchiest points out, the discography is too long to be manageable merged into Death in June.  Additionally, as there's been no support in the year since the merger was proposed, I've removed the proposal box from the top of the article. - BalthCat (talk) 20:25, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger 

message: The way the article was presented downplayed criticism of the band by calling the Southern Poverty Law Center's Hate Watch "detractors" and not noting that they are considered hate music by that organisation.2601:545:C001:7829:EDEC:BFF8:7EFB:D6FC (talk) 15:10, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 7/4/19