Talk:Godsmack/Archive 2

message: Please leave a note on my talk page when the issues listed below have been resolved, so the article be passed as a good article. — Dihydrogen Monoxide 00:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Passed. — Dihydrogen Monoxide 09:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA nomination on hold

message: *I'd just like to point out that the statement: "The band’s name as stated in the home video DVD Smack This! by Merrill, “we stole it from Alice in Chains”, referring to the song “God Smack” from Alice in Chains' second studio album Dirt." - Worded poorly.  Try something like "The band's name, according to Merrill in the Smack This! DVD, was stolen from Alice in Chains' song "God Smack"." is misleading. Upon watching the DVD it makes it pretty obvious that the band is joking, as Robbie says 'I'm trying to think what else they always ask us' so his comments regarding Godsmack's name are basically a joke and an attack on the press.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.157.130 (talk) 00:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Name Origin

message: A user by the name of Skeeker has removed a citation of how many albums Godsmack has sold mutliple times. The citation I insersed was from a Shannon Larkin quote in an interview. Skeeker has provided no reason why he is consistently removing this citation, simply saying "No citations in lead it is either all told their or nothing." Which doesn't make any sense; most artist articles on wikipedia have in the introduction of the article the number of albums/records sold, and provide citation for that number. Why he is removing a valid citation is beyond me.
Perhaps I'm missing something Skeeker, so please explain this to me. If you dont, I plan on reinserting the citation again.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman102100 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Currently the article is going through a Featured Article candidate review. The lead does not need that source, and the source is placed in the article elsewhere anyway. There is more on this topic in the discussion section before this one from a Good Article reviewer, it might be hard to see because it will have a line through it (). Thank you,Skeeker [Talk] 00:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Albums Sold 

message: Godsmack's genre must remain as "Heavy Metal, Post Grunge (early), Hard Rock (later)". This is because their self-titled debut album 'Godsmack', is easily recongnized as Post-Grunge. The next two albums 'Awake' then 'Faceless' are definitely Heavy Metal. Its music, theme, tone, lyrics, and the general fanbase, is Heavy Metal. The band's fourth album 'IV' is NOT heavy metal. The theme, lyrics and tone have changed to the more 'escapist' rather than 'nihilistic' Hard Rock. I am an expert on Metal and only the albums 'Awake' and 'Faceless' can classify as Metal. Anyone who truly knows about the difference between Rock and Metal music would agree.
:It's really very easy; in cases of disagreement, we present the reliable sources.  Whoever can present the best source, that's the genre that's identified.  You forgot to include your source. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, music genres aren't capitalised. See WP:MUSTARD#Capitalization. Funeral 13:38, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oo an expert, I didn't know there was such a thing. The genres are going to stay as they are. The are heavy metal and hard rock, the other two genres, especially nu metal I think can do without, but one editor really likes them being there. ;p Thank you,Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 19:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Wow! Watch the WP:CIVIL! If you ask me there is NO SUCH THING as a "heavy metal expert", and belive me almost every metalhead claims to be (keep in mind I said almost). They are heavy metal, and if you want to delete it go ahead but I will revert it, if you delete it again I will source it very, very good, if you delete it again you will be blocked. Thank you,Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 22:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can get some sources, I got the article to featured article status. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 15:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

text: There you go buddy, I can get more if you really like, unless you want to man-up and call it quits. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 20:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I don't think any of those bands are metal. Metal Archives isn't a reliable source by the way, it is just another wiki. And you failed to mention the other source I got. No don't cry about it. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 02:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Alright, if you want a source so bad, you find it. Quit crying over a little article, mature up a bit, by the way it sounds it is like you are a ten year old. Metal Archives is a wiki, there are members that can contribute to the pages. And the are only a few moderators tht chose who is on the site and who is not, making it a wiki. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 21:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

text: There are sources which say they're a heavy metal band, that's all that matters - Wikipedia uses information from reliable sources to distinguish bands' genres, not its editors' opinions. And Metal Archives is an amateur fansite, thus it fails WP:V; what it says (or doesn't say, in this case) has no bearing on Wikipedia. Funeral 22:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is the final line. I have sources. And you calling me out on metal, look at my userpage and see my music. You oughta know what you are talking about before you say it. I don't want any burning bridges between us, I like to be friends with everybody, and I have never had any such problems, just please drop it. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 22:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Didn't you read the truce proposal? Wow, you still can't handel it. Sad, sad, sad. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 21:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Godsmack are clearly hard rock. Enough with this already. Get your facts str8 man...85.73.111.92 (talk) 07:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

text: You people just can't stop, can you? See my pseudo-monolouge in the section below. Two One Six Five Five  discuss my greatness 20:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As stated four time earlier... The disscussion IS over. It is sourced and that is it. And as a second note "OMFG GROW UP GEEZ." isn't very mature either. Thank you for the irrelivent comment. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 04:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Boy that sounds interesting, I just might join you. Here take a look at this it might help you out a bit: WP:CIVIL. The matter has been discussed, so it is over. And by the way, talk pages are not for useless rants. Here this might help also: WP:NOT. Thank you very much for your very usefull comment. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 21:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

text: That wasn't a rant? Why don't you just drop it? The matter has been discussed. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 21:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, but the point is, the genre has a reliable source, therefore this discussion is over. Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 00:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I really don't care if I am going in circles. Don't call me kid, I'm not a kid. Alright? AMG isn't the bible of genres, I hate reviewers. Point is the matter is sourced and over. They are heavy metal, that is why they are heavy metal. If you really want to repeat yourself more, go ahead, I really don't care. My answer will be the same every time. Have a happy day. :D —Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 02:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree on that, they are most definatlly hard rock. How about we make a coprimise, Heavy metal stays in the infobox, but hard rock is in the lead. Seriously though, if you were to listen to the song "Awake", that is a heavy metal song. The same as is with "I Fucking Hate You" as well as others. Mostly songs on the radio from these guys aren't heavy metal, mainly hard rock singles, however there are plenty of album cuts that are heavy metal. As an answer to you question, I suppose hate isn't a very good word, but I don't like reviewers, because most of the time, I don't think they know what they are talking about. And by saying "kid", in my eyes, that is sort of a personal attack, because typically people will say it when they are pissed. I don't want any burning bridges here, I almost always get along with everyone. And usually the only time I get mad on wiki, is when people bring stuff up about genres that are sourced. You should become a member, because it seems like you kinda know what you are talking about. —Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 21:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Godsmack's Genre 

message: Can we please stop warring and negotiate a WP:TRUCE?
In the meantime, read these:
:WP:COOL
:WP:LOVE
:WP:AGF
:WP:NAM
:WP:AYNA
Thank you, and here's hoping nobody here knows what WP:ARGH! is.... Two One Six Five Five  discuss my greatness 22:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Oh, for crying out friggin' loud...

message: I know it's already a featured article, but still, I was reading the article out of boredom, and found a few problems:
*The (((Godsmack overview))) ref (ref2) is only the opening page of AMG, it should be http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&searchlink=GODSMACK&sql=11:wifpxqujldke~T0.
*Ref 44: I don't think Bass Masta is a reliable source, but anyway, I couldn't even find the quote on the linked Bass Masta site.
*Artistfacts.com is also not much of a reliable source, anybody can add stuff, you only need to register. Gocsa (talk) 22:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just a couple of glitches 

message: Question:  Why is there no mention of Godsmack's days as an Alice in Chains cover band?  Wouldn't this be relevant to the article?  Or is this something that the band themselves don't like to draw attention to?  (And, if so, does that mean it shouldn't be in the article?)  Just wondering.  --DestroyYouAlot (talk) 19:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AIC Cover Band Period