Talk:Midnight Syndicate/Archive 6

message: I am so sick of all your lies, it is quite literally driving me crazy.  Here we go again….  I’ll copy what you’ve stated above and then explain why I disagree.  By the way, I'm not Edward Douglas.  I can only assume you keep asserting that to somehow lend more validity to your arguments, but you are mistaken.
YOU:  He previously argued that Linfaldia was the label and now admits it isn't, then sticks in his Entity company when it was the distributor not the label or the publisher, and all that after I tried to be fair and list Linfaldia and Entity and Monolith together because they were on the album credits together, and I further specified the dates to avoid confusion.
ME:  I never argued that Linfaldia was the label – they were the publisher.  I just corrected the information (replacing Linfaldia with Entity and leaving Monolith).  I also corrected the dates.
YOU:  He promotes his distribution company Entity to the top of the article in a manner that is obviously a self-promo as opposed to being at the bottom in chronological order, when Entity finally became a full-time distributor. I am unsure of what "other" distributors he means but obviously this is not the place for such. 
ME:  It is not a self-promo.  I just thought it fit best there.  You had it stuck in a very odd place in the middle of the article where it made no sense.  Oh no, I remember.  You want people to think Entity was not the distributor right from the beginning, so you inserted it after Vargo and the band split.  Not true.  I would have no objection to moving it closer to the end of the formation section, but the 'full-time' thing has got to go.
YOU:  He removed a link to an audio file (not a website mind you, but a simple audio file) that features a very significant interview with all three members and which was used to cite the statement that the band created music based on Vargo's gothic works (Skinny also removed that statement). That interview is in no way defamatory, and yet he continues to remove it because it tells a very different story than anything being told to the Press today. 
ME:  So not true it’s funny.  It was a link to a defamatory website, not an audio file.  Also, the audio file was citing a statement that the band released “Born of the Night” in September 1998, just in time for Halloween.  That, for whatever bizarro reason, was cited twice, when I don’t think even one ref is necessary.  But, I left one in.  I see now that you have already added the ref back in, but moved it to the statement you mention above.  I’ll look for the audio file to be up soon so we can change the reference.  Finally, I removed the statement that the band created music based on Vargo's gothic works because I don't believe it's true.  We'll see if your file proves it.
YOU:  Note: While Skinny removed the radio spot, he also linked to the Haunted Attraction article that is inaccurate in crediting the appropriate band members with their work. 
ME:  I did not add a link to the Haunted Attraction article.  I just beefed up the reference you already had in the article.
YOU:  We COULD cite that "magazine A" reported such-and-such and "magazine B" reported this-and-that. I would be just fine with that, since it just proves what's been going on. 
ME:  Yes, we could do that.  I suppose it would probably prove that Joseph Vargo is a despicable human being who has been defaming Midnight Syndicate every chance he gets.
YOU: I am not Vargo, nor am I affiliated with him.
and later
YOU:  I think my first edit was merely to start a request for a page for Nox Arcana, then I found the MS page and added all the other previous members of MS including Vargo. 
ME:  Your first edit to the article as GuardianZ is here . Vargo promotion right from the start.  Given the similarity in the style and theme of your edits, I would submit that you used to go by the name Blooferlady who admitted to being Vargo’s business manager here .  I also notice that Blooferlady only turned her attention to the Midnight Syndicate article after her Joseph Vargo and Nox Arcana articles were deleted due to lack of notability.
YOU:  Anyway, when it started up again (the promotion of all that false PR) I came back here to see what was happening, and sure enough, Douglas' gang were at it again. 
ME:  The only reason this whole thing started up again is because someone, probably you, added a link to the defamatory site that’s causing us so many problems here.  All I did was remove the link to that site.  Then you decided to take the opportunity to cause a whole lot of trouble once again.
YOU:  I don't agree with what been going on, but I do like some of their cds and I think the work should be fairly and honestly credited, and if the history is to be reported it should be honestly and fairly reported. 
ME:  I agree.  That’s why I’m here.
YOU: Has anyone checked Indigo to see if it's Skinny? or to see if it's a Chardon IP? I'll bet a million it is. 
ME:  Indigo1032 is not me.  Quite frankly I don’t even know what that individual is talking about in his/her most recent edit.
Finally, I think if you honestly looked at my edits you would see they were fairly minor.  I removed the reference to that site as I have been doing for months because I do not think it has any place here.  I removed a few phrases that I have been disputing on the talk page and which I think serve only to promote Vargo and/or put down the band.  I made a million small edits rather than one huge one so that I could clearly explain what I was doing in each step.  I really didn’t think there was going to be much for you to dispute, but you continue to amaze me with your appetite for conflict. - Skinny McGee 00:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to clarify, I did not mean the interview was defamatory - just that it was housed on a defamatory website.  Also, can you prove that the Vargo article was attacked by the folks from Midnight Syndicate?  That's quite an accusation. - Skinny McGee 18:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not certain Wikipedia allows referencing audio clips of radio interviews, especially one that was uploaded to a free hosting website.  I'll ask those who are experienced with fair use policies.  Dionyseus 18:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: You cited the radio interview at the end of a sentence which read "Published by Vargo's Monolith Graphics and distributed through Douglas' Entity Productions, Born of the Night was released in September 1998, just in time for the Halloween season."  (see here )  The interview does not support that statement at all and the statement was cited twice, so I took that one off. - Skinny McGee 18:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Douglas claims that "Born of the Night" sold 14,000 CDs during it's first Halloween?  Where?  The figures I've seen are closer to 1,800. - Skinny McGee 00:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Once again, you are wrong on every count. - 23:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not going to argue you on this, but I think 'instant success' would imply a much shorter timeframe than 14 months to most people. - Skinny McGee 23:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Response from Skinny McGee to GuardianZ

message: Last sentence in a photo caption  (Plain Dealer, October 30, 2000)  reads:
 "In 1998 Monolith Graphics produced the cd Born of the Night which streamlined 
 the music of local band Midnight Syndicate to appeal to a gothic audience. The success 
 of Born of the Night spawned Midnight Syndicate's latest release, Realm of Shadows. "
The 1998 radio interview for the release of Born of the Night: Edward Douglas states: 
 "Joe suggested we do a Halloween CD...  Joe wanted to create a Halloween CD that 
 would have music that would reflect his artwork... to conceptualize a CD that would go 
 along with the gothic artwork that you create... am I right Joe?"
The interview does not state that Douglas "approached" Vargo with the Born of the Night concept, nor any concept for that matter. It only states that Douglas gave Vargo his first self-titled Midnight Syndicate cd upon hearing the music that Vargo had chosen to play in his art gallery.
Again, Skinny, you are twisting the facts. Also, because this is all recorded long before the band breakup and before Edward started making false statements to the press, it trumps the statements made by Douglas in his 2006 interview in Haunted Attraction. GuardianZ 20:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not going to argue you on this, but I think 'instant success' would imply a much shorter timeframe than 14 months to most people. - Skinny McGee 23:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotes from press and radio

message: I have submitted a request for arbitration for this article.  Active editors may wish to prepare a request statement.  An arbitration clerk will probably place the request on the active page shortly. DurovaCharge! 04:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Request for arbitration]] filed 

message: I have requested for the article to be protected, I don't think User:GuardianZ would stop edit warring until that happens.  Dionyseus 18:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have requested for the article to be protected 

message: Your recent removal of the phrase "According to the 2006 interview in Haunted Attraction..." is a deceptive edit. Because that reference is contradicted by the one directly below it from 1998, BOTH must remain intact to be balanced. Also, please stop removing the phrases such as those describing concept and roles, and reducing Vargo's contributions to merely naming a few songs. His other contributions are clearly verified in the 1998 radio interview, and you repeated removal of that text is very disruptive and deceptive. Also, your continued attempts to make the first cd sound dark like the others is deceptive. The cd is predominantly pop/light-rock oriented. Of the 17 tracks, 3 are instrumental pieces that could be considered "dark" and that appeared on later albums. 3 of 17 is not a majority, and it is deceptive to say so. GuardianZ 03:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Skinny, please avoid using deceptive terms/adjectives and removing cites 

message: No, it is not a deceptive edit and I'm not removing any 'cites'.  The sentence is referenced as being from Haunted attraction magazine, so it's repetitive to state that.  Also, as I've stated several times before, it does not contradict anything.  I remove the statements regarding concept and roles because I don't believe them to be accurate based on the radio interview and the Haunted Attraction article.  I do not reduce Vargo's contributions to 'merely naming a few songs' and to say that is utterly ridiculous.  Do you read my edits before you revert?  I make no attempt, let alone continued attempts, to make the first disk sound like the others.  All the musical genres on the disk are mentioned in the article.  But, there were definitely several dark tracks (more than three) and to reduce it to 'light rock' is wrong and it is deceptive to say that. - Skinny McGee 01:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I just checked the CD.  I would say 10 of the 17 tracks have dark themes.  And two more have sci-fi/fantasy themes.  That is certainly a majority. - Skinny McGee 02:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GuardianZ, please stop accusing me of doing things I am clearly not doing

message: Skinny, I know why you don't want to credit Vargo, even though the sources clearly state that the Born of the Night album was his concept. Edward is already credited with the cinefusion concept and that is also verified, but why did you remove Gavin's credit with his solo work with Lore? It's mentioned in several interviews (too many to reference each one just for that brief statement, but still verifiable) and is certainly noteworthy in the history of this band. What is your reasoning? GuardianZ 00:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly, I never removed any verified credits for Vargo.  Secondly, I believe someone in the workshop said the information about Lore was promotional or otherwise superfluous, so I removed it since I was editing in that area anyway. It's back in now. - Skinny McGee 02:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I do not care about the order of the refs.  Our disagreement in the past was in the order of references before we added the citations (I thought most recent first was most appropriate, you wanted them the other way).  I added the Haunted Attraction ref to support that both Vargo and Douglas wanted to do a Halloween CD.  You are exactly right in what you state above - that is exactly why I'm writing it as I am.  I firmly believe the references indicate both had the idea to do a Halloween CD, and I reinserted the HA ref to back that up.  As I've said before, why else would Douglas have approached Vargo at his gallery?  Of course he thought they could work together on something dark.  Additionally, Vargo had the idea to base the CD on his artwork.  Finally, I think you are misinterpreting Douglas' statement regarding cinefusion.  The whole concept of creating a storyline to an instrumental CD (as has been done with all their releases) is cinefusion. - Skinny McGee 01:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's up with removing credits to Gavin?