Talk:Tommy Shaw

message: A small, select few Dennis DeYoung and/or Styx fans are trashing Tommy Shaw, James Young & Styx pages.  Please confine your remarks to those which address the article itself and that can be cited using a neutral POV and please don't trash the Tommy Shaw or JY pages nor trash Tommy & JY on the Styx or DDY pages or they will probably all be nominated for indefinite locking, including the DDY page if the trash spills over there, which nobody who really cares about DDY, JY, Tommy or Styx want. It appears to be nothing more than a couple of young, anonymous individuals who have self-esteem issues that are intent on imposing their will and interjecting their uncited, POV remarks so the world will know how they feel, which is sad, but not amusing nor relevant to the articles.--Bamadude 22:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The lock is on now, so the anonymous IP vandal will be blocked for a while.  I'll reapply it to lock it again permanently if the user comes back for more.--Bamadude 19:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: This anonymous user who declines to sign in, reveal itself and stand behind its words has failed to provide any solid edits with cited sources, preferring instead to bash Tommy Shaw & JY over their alleged hijacking of the Styx name.  I've called upon this user to provide for everyone exactly what info it wants to insert and provide verified sources for it and the user declined again, preferring to bloviate its opinions and sorrows about DDY no longer being in Styx and how they now suck because of it.  That doesn't constitute a solid contribution to an article.  This user also uses mulitple IP addresses to make people think that a cabal of people is backing up their claims, but they state NO FACTS & HAVE NO SOURCES for their edits, only opinions.--Bamadude 02:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

text: "Quitcherbitchin" and cite the facts, plain and simple.  If you want to edit an article on Wikipedia, cite the facts; the rest is garbage you or some other person created that has nothing to do with reality.  If you REALLY believed in what you're saying, you'd sign in and stand behind it like I do.--Bamadude 01:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: VANDALISM here & at related STYX pages

message: Tommy Shaw & J.Y. do not lead a "version" of Styx as this implies a opinionated, negative connotation that there is more than 1 version of Styx or that the band led by Tommy & JY is not the official Styx band, when in fact there is only 1 band/lineup named Styx and there has only ever been 1.  This lineup doesn't include Dennis DeYoung (thankfully, but that's my opinion), but it IS the official group named Styx and DDY was paid well for that right after his termination or mutual parting, however you wish to see it, and the group is as legitimate as a group led only by DDY & JY, if one existed.  If you doubt that, a parallel viewpoint would be that the 1975 & onward "version" of Styx that included Shaw, DDY, JY and the Panozzo brothers was simply a "version" after the 1975 Equinox album as it didn't include all the original members when Shaw joined, which is ridiculous.  Furthermore, DDY has only been legally granted the right to use the wording "formerly of Styx" in his billing; he doesn't lead a "version" of anything except his own showy act, prefering to work solo and use orchestral reworkings of Styx songs in his show.  If you consider the heyday of the group, Styx has 2 "main" members from that time period of their greatest popularity.  There are many groups who have members who were not the founding members, but are considered the "main" members in the group's history and are a legitimate band --- Pink Floyd without Syd Barrett and later even without Roger Waters comes to mind; Chicago is another, Genesis after Peter Gebriel and Yes on the 90125 album could be added to that argument.  To say that the current lineup of Styx is not legitimate because DDY isn't there is strictly POV, not a fact that belongs in the article.--Bamadude 06:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A "version" of Styx addressed

message: This article had many tangential discussions noting news & achievements by other members of Styx which were done simply to portray the subject of the article in a negative light for no justifiable reason other than to trash Shaw, while a few were legitimate statements which belongs in the Styx article, not here.  These diversions had nothing to do with the subject of the article and were removed to make the article more concise, encyclopedic & non-POV.  This is an article about Tommy Shaw period, and any statements made should be those which are directly attached to the subject and should be factual, non-fanisms and certainly not "attack" statements by detractors.  To state something to the effect of "Shaw had a hit, but DeYoung had a bigger hit" is not appropriate.  The entire focus of the article should be on the subject himself and should only state his achievements & actions; anything outside of that should be stated only if necessary to progress the article forward while focused on the subject.  This is Journalism 102, a little beyond the basics, but focus and non-POV statements and imperative in all Wikipedia articles to maintain any semblance of credibility.66.191.157.181 22:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Revamping

message: There needs to be serious revisions to aspects of this entry. This is more of a fan cite than an informative article. The "Tommy and his Fans" area should be taken out or the Point Of View stuff removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98percenthuman (talk • contribs) 19:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There were serious revisions needed to this article and they have been addressed and revised. This was more of a fan cite prior to the revisions. Marvtixx 06:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Note

message: User Aguerriero removed a section titled "Tommy and his fans" since it was not written in an encyclopedic tone, and it was completely unsourced. --Aguerriero (talk) 04:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Editing Performed - Article Looks Good Now 

message: Adding tour dates into the text of the article is a recipe for incorporating dated material.  A link to StyxWorld.com would be better as it incorporates that info already and it doesn't require constant maintenance.--Bamadude 15:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think, given the constancy with which this page is monitored, that out-of-date material will be an issue. In my opinion, the addition of a few specific venues, with reputable sourcing, may help to prevent the insertion of unsourced, NPOV violations regarding the nature of the current tour. Moonriddengirl 15:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: You certainly have a point there.--Bamadude 19:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tour Dates

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Tommy Shaw. 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/20111101120127/http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/tours/Tours.htm to http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/tours/Tours.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110313083418/http://opry.com/news/2011/03-09b.html to http://www.opry.com/news/2011/03-09b.html
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) 12:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The second album titled Don’t Tread was released. In the article is states it was not. Of that were true, I would not have it. This needs to be corrected. 2600:1702:3E30:7630:E105:36C9:A1FE:5384 (talk) 08:14, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damn Yankees