Talk:Dissection (band)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dissection (band) article.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Suicide?

I'm not sure this information should be published as of yet (8/18). It has not been confirmed by any concrete sources. Dissection's website does not make any mention of it and the suicide apparently happened a few days ago

  • They do now 83.102.70.52 21:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Indeed it has been confirmed. It's a sad day for extreme metal

[edit] Bootlegs

Can't think of any reason why these would be encyclopedia-worthy, and would open the floodgates for literally millions of other bootlegs being listed elsewhere. Unless the bootleg has some intrinsic notability, e.g. Mayhem's Dawn Of The Black Hearts then they should be deleted on sight. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 21:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Genre delimiter

I see there is a genre delimiter edit war (again :/). Please stop, leave it as it was before the war (line breaks) as it worked fine for this article and 99% of all other metal articles (as metal band articles tend to feature long genre names). It now looks totally stupid having 1 genre on 2 rows: blackened death
metal. Leave it alone. Kameejl (Talk) 19:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm reverting it as it is inconsistent with the majority of metal band articles. And because 1 genre is on 2 rows: blackened death
metal. Kameejl (Talk) 18:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Not to mention Twsx said he was "wikifying"...no such word or thing. I said that once before in a edit summary and some other users were upset saying I could not say that and it means nothing on wikipedia. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 03:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
All too funny. ~ twsx | talkcont | ~ 07:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Album images

The general consensus now is that album images have no place in discography listings, due to the fact that they are not accompanied by critical commentary- they are just there for decoration. Take a look at the page I wrote on the subject a little while ago. J Milburn (talk) 18:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I know of no such consensus and "screen shots in lists of episodes" is not the same things as using some album cover pictures in an article right above the name (and link to) of said album. As far as fair use goes, I also disagre with that. I don't believe that those album covers are being used in a soley decorative puprose on this page (or others, such as Death and I believe that they do, in fact, add to the article. The whole fair use things is getting ridiculous. Eventually wikipedia will have no pictures at all as they'll all be scrapped as "unencyclopedic." I understand fair use and the reason it is needed, but where do we draw the line? The problem with that policy is that it doesn't state clearly enough any line. Yes, we should not just plaster pictures everywhere for decorative purposes alone, but if a picture pertains to an article then bam, it should be in. We don't wanna overkill with the picture but I don't think we should necceasrily just get rid of them all. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 23:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)