User talk:Maurauth/Archive Jun 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Frosthold

You seem local to Frosthold (they are from Portsmouth) - you should create their page as you've linked them on the Hanzel und Gretyl page, but it doesn't exist... --80.168.188.77 14:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More info - might be useful for this article - sorry if it's messy, I'm not very good at this Wiki!

Their website: frosthold.zapto.org

Discography (from website):

  1. Flames of Hatred (Planned release 2007)
  2. Once Again In Humankind (Demo - 2006)
  3. Winterswar (Demo - 2005)

Discography (from http://www.metal-archives.com/)

Once Again In Humankind
Demo, Unsigned, April 24th, 2006

  1. Once Again In Humankind
  2. River of Thorns
  3. To The End Of The Sky

Winterswar
Demo, Unsigned, April 2005

  1. Winterswar
  2. Once Again In Humankind
  3. Into The Underworld

Link to image - not sure of it's copyright etc.

List of previous shows also on their website, they've played with Cradle of Filth as well as loads of other bands, local and national, and played a few festivals by the looks of things (not ones I've heard of)

Their forum (also linked on the website) link here may also contain more info about them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.168.188.77 (talk) 10:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC).

I'm creating the page on User:Maurauth/Frosthold/ before adding it to the main wiki. I've joined their forums to see if I can get more information so that the page is better. I saw them with Cradle and hope to see them again at some point, when I get my new DSLR camera I'll try and get some good photos for the article if they give permission to photo them. ≈ Maurauth (nemesis) 11:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More Frosthold research

Hi Maurauth - just thought you might want to add these review links in also (taken from the official website):

I also found a review some time ago in Zero Tolerance magazine, so I've typed it up for you:

Debut CDR from this English band, containing three tracks of old school black metal with melodic elements - think early Burzum, Nargaroth or Borknagar. As so often on demos, the songs are strangled by a tinny and distant production, and the guitar sound is a little clean for my tastes (there are even solos!), but there's a decent band in here somewhere. Download these tracks for free and check it out yourself.

- Reviewed by Simon Collins in Zero Tolerance #007 (Sept/Oct 2005).

The track "Winterswar" was also on the covermount CD of the same episode (Track #14), which was mastered by Leon Macey (from Mithras).

Cheers! --81.179.39.161 23:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Forgot to add the full names of the band members:

  • James Titcumb
  • Phil Warwick
  • Joss Lambert
  • Tom Clayton

Ex-members:

  • Ben Hayes (now in Enochian Theory)
  • Chris Wagg
  • Nestor Dgebuadze (I think thats the right spelling!)

[edit] Iron Maiden page

I see. You are willing to cite MetalHammer, Paul Stenning, and Mick Wall as reliable resources? You obviously do not know anything about historical research. I have researched thousands of resources covering Iron Maiden, and you can read my historiography about most sources related to Iron Maiden at http://maidenshows.ryasrealm.com/masterlistresearchnotes.htm.

Because citing sources is important, I wonder why MetalHammer does not? Why doesn't Mick Wall or Paul Stenning? IT IS POINTLESS TO CITE A SECONDARY SOURCE THAT DOES NOT CITE ITS SOURCES. The majority of the citations on the Iron Maiden page come from unreliable sources, and none of the secondary sources use proper historical methods. Only someone ignorant would take Wall's or Stenning's sources at face value. Read my historiography about them and you will notice why.

If you go to my Tourography page and hover your mouse over 1786 of the dates/locations listed (87% of all dates/locations listed), you will see my citation for that date/location. In many cases, a date/location has more than one citation. I have over 2000 citations on that page from primary sources and some secondary sources, which means I have more than 2000 more reliable sources cited on my Tourography than the entire Wikipedia page for Iron Maiden. Add a master's in history degree (will be completed in less than a month), and I'm confident that my credentials as a reliable source hold up.

In the meantime, I will keep adding my Tourography of the band to the site. If you continue to delete the link, Maurauth, it only proves that you care less about using reliable sources and more about maintaining dictatorial control over the web page.

Try to stay cool, there's a difference between what you consider reliable sources and WP:Reliable Sources. ≈ Maurauth (nemesis) 22:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I am in compliance

I am following Wikipedia guidelines by posting my link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:EL

It clearly states that outside links are acceptable:

"Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews."

While the page insists that links should not be added for the sake of adding links, it says links that are of help to the topic are encouraged.

Removing my links makes you the vandal, not me. Honestly, I do not know why you insist on deleting my Tourography. Why do you want to hide such helpful information from Iron Maiden fans?

Because MetalHammer is a reliable source, whereas your fancruft site is not! Also: Please don't stalk me to other websites I contribute on and send me hate mail, that's against not just the rules, but the law. ≈ Maurauth (nemesis) 10:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My "warning"

I gave a good reason in the edit summary and in the talk page. Please don't leave vandalism warnings when that ain't the case. Not a dog 14:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cow tipping

You seem to be close to violating WP:3RR. Not a dog 15:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re:May 2007

Take your vandalism message and shove it, you're the one vandalizing by removing references. 209.214.141.2 18:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivium education moves

Hi, I've noticed you tried to move Trivium education article. Somehow, it didn't work, and there are two articles now with the same content. I think, it looks like you tried to move the talk page, when you should have move the main page. No worry, honest mistake! I've just contacted admin to see if one of them can sort it out for us, i.e. delete the duplicate page. I'm not too sure if the Trivium (band) page is more important/widely known than the education thing, so it may be better, after admin has sorted it out (and if they don't decide to do this) to do a requested move. Not sure quite how to do this, but the info is here. But as I said, admin may decide to do that anyway, so just wait and see if they do! Happy editing! Asics talk Editor review! 15:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It's been sorted now! And the band have been seen to be more notable, or at least more searched for, therefore are at Trivium! Asics talk Editor review! 15:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial use of Image:2007 0526DevilsRoadshow0022.JPG

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:2007 0526DevilsRoadshow0022.JPG, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:2007 0526DevilsRoadshow0022.JPG is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:2007 0526DevilsRoadshow0022.JPG itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 11:46, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:FrostholdDevilsRoadshow.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:FrostholdDevilsRoadshow.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:TriviumBandIn2006.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:TriviumBandIn2006.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright problems with Image:TwelveTribesBand.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:TwelveTribesBand.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Not a dog 02:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright problems with Image:TwelveTribesLive.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:TwelveTribesLive.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Not a dog 02:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:DaniFilthFairUse.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DaniFilthFairUse.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Not a dog 02:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial use of Image:DaniFilthLive2007.JPG

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:DaniFilthLive2007.JPG, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:DaniFilthLive2007.JPG is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:DaniFilthLive2007.JPG itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:TwelveTribesBand.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TwelveTribesBand.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Not a dog 12:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Idle Hands
Rough Cutt
Bevan Davies
La Carrera Panamericana
Beaulieu-sur-Loire
Joe Lynn Turner
David Lowery
Tranent
Naomi (band)
Beaulieu River
Bloodsimple
Robert Lowery (actor)
Ginger Fish
Raoul Lowery
Rudy Sarzo
Beaulieu, Calvados
Eddie Lowery
Corey Bringas
Northland College (Wisconsin)
Cleanup
Panic! at the Disco
Killswitch Engage
Lowery
Merge
Anthem (insurance)
Umpteen
Los Angeles Fire Department
Add Sources
Randy Castillo
Keyra Augustina
Ozzfest
Wikify
Red flag warning
Corey-House-Posner-Whitesides reaction
Tom Jones (singer)
Expand
Alan Marshall
CBS reduction
Glenn Ljungström

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 18:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your cat breed

Hey a bit off topic, but what breed is your cat, it really resembles my cat and I always wondered what breed my cat is. Sorry if I'm being incredibly ignorant of cats :) ≈ Maurauth (nemesis) 12:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. As far as we know, he's a typical domestic short hair, and appears to have some Siamese features and temperament. He was rescued from a park as a kitten, so it's a bit of a mystery. Reward 17:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] To Do

  1. Include photo at B.C. Rich of Warlock in lead-in to illustrate BC Rich guitars extreme body shapes. - Taken.
  2. Include photo at Gamepad of Trust Pad in lead-in to illustrate a Gamepad. - Taken.
  3. Include photo at Frosthold of Once.. demo in lead-in to illustrate the album. - Taken.
  4. Include photo at Total Guitar of cover (Jun2007) in lead-in to illustrate the magazine. - Taken.
  5. Include photo at Metal Hammer of cover (Jun2007) in lead-in to illustrate the magazine.

≈ Maurauth (nemesis~☆) 13:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Article Review

The Metal Project has yet to really take off, so I am mostly taking care of article assessments. If you want an assessment, just add {{HMM}} to the article's talk page and it'll end up in a category of unassessed metal articles. I usually check these and then give them a rating. If there's a specific article you wish to improve to a specific status, you're welcome to request feedback from myself on how to achieve that status. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bradley Joseph will give you a rough idea of my credentials on giving feedback to music related articles. LuciferMorgan 11:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not necessarily...

Wikipedia claims that scholars may considered authoritative if they are writing on their subject and they are peer reviewed.

I am a historian. I write about popular culture, and Iron Maiden is one of my specialties. My site has been peer reviewed and accepted by my committee chair as authoratative under university guidelines. The university's guidelines fall under national historical guidelines. Ad hoc, ergo propter hoc. My site is authoritative.

Wikipedia guidelines also claim that links to other sites are acceptable if they provide authoritative information not warranting being a part of the main body text. My tourography does that.

You accuse me of vandalism, but the fact is, I am following Wikipedia guidelines. I am not subverting anything. I am sharing good information that is relative to the topic of Iron Maiden.

The only thing I cannot understand is why you are so adamant about including misinformation and excluding a quality source from being linked to the Iron Maiden page. It makes no sense to me.

maidenshows@ryasrealm.com ---> If you care to discuss this further. Right now, I am under the impression that you care more about controlling the page than about making it useful.

[edit] Fooled you.

Image:Fooled-you.jpg This user has been fooled by Destructo_087.

You deserve this.

[edit] Mudkip

Please don't revert the edits made by me or other users in which we remove the section regarding "Mudkip in popular culture." There has been a devastatingly long discussion on its talk page and nobody has yet to give a sufficient explanation about why that section should be included in the article, nor has anybody given a credible secondary source to back-up the claim that the quote "so i herd u liek mudkips" is an "internet phenomenon." Because of this, the section is not being included for as long as it takes for, and no less time than it takes anybody to dig up a valid secondary source to cite the information. When somebody removes this section in the future, please don't revert their edits. Thank you. --Ksy92003 (talk) 06:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iron Maiden page

Please read my comments on the Iron Maiden page about the tourography link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Iron_Maiden#Iron_Maiden_tourography

Part of my post was an apology to you. Since you haven't responded, I can only assume you did not see it.

I am having a problem with 156.34.142.110: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/156.34.142.110 I believe he also is registered as Peter Fleet. He continually deletes the tourography link despite its compliance within Wikipedia protocols and majority acceptance by other uses. In fact, he is the only person who voiced an opinion on the talk page that dissents, and he is still making changes against the wishes of the majority.

If you know of any way to get him to quit bucking the majority, please let me know. This guy only seems to care about control over others and not about the value of the content. Thank you. --Darthrya

Warn him and then contact an admin. ≈ Maurauth (nemesis~☆) 15:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Vandalism"

Why did you think my edit was vandalism? The page I removed from the list exixts only as a redirect now, so there's no point in keeping it. --Jamdav86 15:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I said it was removal of content, which it was. If it's just a redirect then remove the link, it should still be disambig'd as it's a song by cradle of filth of the same name. ≈ Maurauth (nemesis~☆) 15:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:DaniFilth.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:DaniFilth.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editor review

I reviewed you. If you have any questions or comments about your review, or anything else, please contact my talk page. Cheers, wpktsfs 03:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Maurauth. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that you recently used an automated Wikipedia function (namely 'Undo') to revert in a content dispute, without leaving an appropriate edit summary (see [here).

Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. Daniel 07:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:TwelveTribesBand.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TwelveTribesBand.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect names

Regardless of which is more popular, and especially by your perspective, the band and anything else that has adopted the name from the device itself. When someone searches for the band, in their right mind, they would capitalise the "M". Otherwise, they would be taken to the disambiguation page. Popularity among certain persons doesn't make it necessary to style the articles in their favour. I'm reverting your edit again. Don't start an edit war unless you can contest as to why it should be moved back and popularity is not a reason. Not everyone thinks of the band when they think of an iron maiden. Reginmund 18:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

It's hardly my perspective, lets have a little looksee at google:
Results 1 - 10 of about 4,980,000 for iron maiden
Results 1 - 10 of about 901 for iron maiden "torture device"
That's including out of the 901 the pages that are mirrors of wiki pages with the disambig to the device from the bands page, or sites about the band stating they were named after the torture device. ≈ Maurauth (nemesis~☆) 18:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
From your search of iron maiden, you have no authority as to whether or not all of the "iron maiden" pages (which actually brings 3,220,000 hits) link to the band (and from reviewing the search pages themselves, many link to the torture device). When searching for "iron maiden torture device" (which actually brings 227,000 hits), many articles will be omitted seeing as the latter two words are redundant. The usage of the "obscure" Latin words and apparatuses is only your PoV and less of those who could care less about the metal bands. Apparent to your edit history, several other users have reverted the names "trivium" back to "trivia (disambiguation)" and "iron maiden" back to "iron maiden (torture device)" while in combat to them and me, you start an edit war. I also note that you have pushed your PoV so far as to have vandalised iron maiden (disambiguation). http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iron_maiden_%28disambiguation%29&diff=137698728&oldid=123406942

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalise either pages, I will report you to an administrator. Thank you Reginmund 18:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay then, I've broadened the search terms to give a further insight:
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,640,000 for iron maiden band
Results 1 - 10 of about 449,000 for iron maiden medieval
Following the search for just "iron maiden" out of the first 25 pages of google search there are only two links not about the band, one of them being about a frozen seafood company. The other being the wiki page for the torture device, the most probable reason for this being people searching for the band and being redirected there! I stopped checking after 25 pages as this was just a quick look. You say that "many link to the torture device." 1/250 is many?
After clearly asserting the notability of the band over the torture device, I'm kindly asking you to not make personal attacks that I am "vandalising" pages by editing the order of them to show the more notable parts first, if you think that the notability is in question then I'll gladly place them in alphabetical order. Also a side note, if you state I am in an "edit war" then it would not be vandalism, but a conflict of interests. Several other users have also reverted your changes back to this way too. ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 20:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Maurauth, here's my view of the matter. Your searching takes into account the Internet only- however, in terms of book sources, there will be far, far, far more references to the torture device and the latin word. In the case of Iron Maiden, I think it is clear cut that people will be more interested in the torture device. Look at it like this- if we fast forward to 2100, are many people going to care about the band? No. However, right now, hundreds of years after it was in use, people still care to research the iron maiden. I think, as a fan of heavy metal music, you are biased. I am trying to think of an example from the realms of non-metal music... Oh! Bauhaus. As far as I am concerned, nobody cares about some German school, but, Bauhaus, the band, are the founders of gothic rock- how could you not care about them?! Also, it is worth noting, in both cases, the bands are named after the archaic meaning. J Milburn 21:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, in that case the third option shall do for now and I'll take a trip to the Winchester public library and my local library in the next week or so and have a look at how many books there are written about the torture device. Well you can hardly make predictions about the next century, as there wasn't exactly a popular culture that revolved so greatly around music up to the last few decades well people don't exactly still care to research that much as I looked through the first 250 results of google and only one of them was even talking about the device and that page also refered to the band! I also think that he is biased as he expresses his interest in history and British history. Now you point it out there should probably be a disambiguation when you search for "Bauhaus" but the example is very different because the school of Art is much more notable not just because gothic rock has dried out these days, but if you also google search "Bauhaus" the results are more talking about the school than the band. ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 21:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Skimming through the search hits on google is not an approximation, especially when you insert terms to limit the amount of hits. A search engine is not a reliable source to start with about how "popular" something is, seeing as the countless unofficial fan clubs and forums will raise the amount. Since when does the Internet have forums and fan clubs about a torture device? Unless lynching is more popular than music, there wont be any. As for the idea that an iron maiden is obscure, its iconic image has given way to many references in popular culture (e.g. an obscure band. its occurence has been seen even in the stereotypes of mediaeval society and how it is percieved by aficionados of a band named after the apparatus, causing them to create forums and vandalise Wikipedia's pages (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iron_maiden_%28disambiguation%29&action=history) gives absolutely no consensus whatsoever as to the band being more popular.

Reginmund 23:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't limit the hits, I typed in "iron maiden" without even capital letters to notate that it's the band, rather than the torture device. Exactly as you say; countless unofficial fan clubs and forums will be about the band, and none about the torture device - this clearly asserts that the band is much more notable as more people know about it and to be honest nobody knows about 'stereotypes' of medievil society, nobody has vandalised the page that was an edit and if you continue to refer to my edits as vandalism I will report you for it. It also gives no consensus that the torture device is more popular, what do you suggest as a way of testing who is more notable. ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 08:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Without capital letters makes no difference. Google searches are not case sensitive. Don't try that defence again because it just doesn't work. As for the amount of forums, there is no say as to how many more people know about something, just because they are an aficionado. Simple apparatuses have no merit to have fan clubs unless lynching and torture were still popular methods of murder today as they were for several hundred years. Take a look at the Google search for Franz Ferdinand. Most of the pages that come up are about the band, but Franz Ferdinand is better known as an archduke. Remember that the Internet is not a poll to see how popular something is. Regardless, the apparatus is well-renowed, and enough to be so that we use it in the objective form on Wikipedia. That means necessarily putting the "m" in lowercase. Writing it in lowercase is just incorrect when referring to the band and if one does, they will simply click on the disambiguation link and then the link to the band. As for your vandalism (which yes, it is), I think it is necessary to report blanking pages (i.e. iron maiden disambiguation don't deny it again) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iron_maiden_%28disambiguation%29&diff=137698728&oldid=123406942 Reporting me for warning you about vandalism is unusual seeing as you were the one who commited the vandalism. There is no policy against reporting vandalism, in fact we encourage it here on Wikipedia. That is why we have templates. If you are unsure about what personal attacks are this might help you as it is from the WP:NPA page...

<User copied from NPA page here>

Now there is no need to try the "reporting defence" either. Reginmund 13:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

You said I limited the amount of hits, I did not, I typed "iron maiden". You said that people know about something, surely that's completely against your argument, people who know about it won't be searching wikipedia so all those 'Maiden fans will be going to the wiki to become knowledgeable about it. The notability of a subect compared to another has nothing to do with the knowledgeable people on that subject. Franz Ferdiand is better known as the historical figures among people who like to learn about history, but the band is much more well known in popular culture being one of the most famous indie bands of the current century! The internet may not be a poll to see how popular something is but it does give a fair approximation. I guess I agree with you there then, they can click it from the disambiguation link - I've provided a third option, "Iron maiden" will link to the disambiguation page and people searching for the band can click the correct link. I guess that's solved then. However when you are in an 'edit war' with another member, do not refer to their edits as vandalism as neither of your edits are vandalism, but a conflict of interest what you are doing could be considered by slandarous and insulting to some people. The diff you provided is from weeks ago and I removed the redirect as the Disambiguation page redirected to the torture device article which is not wikipedia policy. ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 18:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are trying to say in your second sentence. It sounds something like "I said some people were aware of something and that saying that is against my argument and those people that know that something will not use Wikipedia and the Iron Maiden fans are all going to Wikipedia to learn about their favourite band"... could you clarifly that? However, I never said anything about whether or not the people searching for Iron Maiden aren't knowledgeable. There is absolutely no consensus, whatsoever as to say that Franz Ferdinand is better renowned than his musical counterpart moreso than an iron maiden is. For the sake of the people who could care less about the band (including me) and even care less about the torture device, they would have more knowledge of the torture device. The apparatus has been in use for centuries and has even had an obscure band named after it. The band has peaked thirty years, yet the apparatus retains its iconic status in popular culture. Remember that the Internet "poll" is not a poll to decide whether or not a subjet is more popular. Remember that as much Google hits on Franz Ferdinand were on the archduke as there were for the apparatus. That doesn't give reason to be that the band is more "popular" than the archduke. As I think we all know, both bands were named after the main subjects that should stay the main articles. To refer to "iron maiden" as a band is just incorrect unless the "I" and "M" are capitalised and unless you can think of a beter excuse to use a grammatical error when redirecting a page, an iron maiden will not be considered the same thing as Iron maiden. As for your vandalism, I think you misunderstood me. You blanked the disambiguation page. That is vandalism and you can consult the Wikipedia guidelines if you do not believe me.

Reginmund 00:07, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay then if you're arguing gramatically "Trivium" should definitly go to the band not the latin singular form of trivia as that's incorrect, fine I'll go and change that redirection then.
In my second sentence I was replying to "how many more people know about something, just because they are an aficionado" which doesn't make sense and I was trying to understand your babble.
You can't say that if people don't know about the band they won't know about the torture device, a significant portion of the populations outside of europe will be much more likely to have heard of the band than the obscure torture device.
How is the torture device iconic in popular culture OTHER than down to the band? I'm sorry but I've never seen it refered to before on television, the radio, in any modern books or in the newspaper.
Also, you can't be comparing Franz Ferdinand to Iron Maiden because you're saying that there was an equal ratio of person to band as there was object to band... when you search for "iron maiden" on the first 25 pages of results there is only ONE link to the torture device.
I did not vandalise the disambiguation page, it only says I blanked it because all it was was a redirect, you do NOT have a disambiguation page if it is just a redirect to an article! ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 16:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I never said anything about how trivium should go to the band, instead of the disambiguation page. Don't misconstrue that. It is the Latin singular form of trivia; that is definitely something worth mentioning in the beginning of the article and it has other meanings besides a band. There is again no consensus as to whether or not more people outside of Europe know more about the band. Don't think I don't know because I do, I am currently residing in Los Angeles. Just because you haven't heard of the apparatus is mass media, doesn't mean it isn't there. In fact I have seen several references to the apparatus in The Simpsons, the Saw films, at least three Edgar Allan Poe stories, and not to mention its iconic status in Nuremberg. As for Franz Ferdinand, it had as many more links to the band when I searched for it on Google as the apparatus does compared to the band. The apparatus has as much credibility as the archduke and it should stay that way. Franz Ferdinand is an archduke. An iron maiden is a torture device. Any other meanings are on the disambiguation page. That's why there is a link to it on the iron maiden's page. As for the blanking of iron maiden (disambiguation), that is considered vandalism. If it was a dead link, you could have just provided the right links or left it alone.

Reginmund 18:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

You said that "Iron Maiden" should link to the band and "iron maiden" should link to the torture device, by that logic "Trivium" should link to the band and "trivium" should link to the archaic form of trivia.
Of course it has other meanings besides the band so I've put them in alphabetical order, and added to the end that it may also refer to the latin word for trivia.
I didn't say anything about consensus but I made a practical assumption that people outside of europe will know more about an item of popular culture rather than an obscure european historical device. I never said that it doesn't feature in mass media, however that Iron Maiden is much more often represented in mass media.
When you google "franz ferdinand" there are slightly more hits for the band than the historical figure, but when you google "iron maiden" in the first 250 results only one of them refers to the apparatus.
I removed an error in a page, that is not vandalism the version that I blanked was a redirect to the torture device rather than an actual disambiguation page. Now, excuse me but I'm missing Doctor Who. ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 18:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
By Wikipedia's default, the first word in the search is automatically capitalised. In this case, there is no way of distinguishing trivium from Trivium. However, iron maiden has two words so the second word may be capitalised or miniscule to avoid confusion. As for "trivium", one might wonder what it actually means, well it is the Latin plural of "trivia". That is why it should be directly indicated at the top. Same thing with iron maiden. The only reason that there are other things called "iron maiden" is because they were named after the apparatus and it should that should be indicated at the top too. That goes for the same as Franz Ferdinand and there are as many links to the archduke compared to the apparatus in contrast to the bands. Just because you "practically assume" something by your PoV, doesn't give enough merit, and that doesn't even make it obscure. To me, the band is completely obscure and until I came across this dispute, I only knew of an iron maiden as an apparatus. I, myself would also "practically assume" that the iron maiden is better-known arond the world as a torture device and lesser known as a band with a cult following. You also have no merit whatsoever to say that the apparatus has less recognition in popular culture. I have never seen the band in any mass media form before although I have seen several occurences of the apparatus. It is still vandalism what you did because if there is no disambiguation on iron maiden, then you can at least create one or leave it be since a redirect is better than a blank page.

P.S. I don't need to be informed of your personal affairs (i.e. Doctor Who). It is dead weight emphasis on your point.

Reginmund 20:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes it is the Latin plural of trivia, but it is also the name of a Band and has two other meanings, stop pushing your point of view by insisting that that is at the top of the page. Franz Ferdinand is a completely different situation and I don't see why you are mentioning it. You say my assumptions are PoV, as are yours! You think the band is obscure, I think the device is obscure, you think the band is not mentioned in popular culture, I think the device is mentioned less in popular culture; hence I provided a third option for both the edit wars. "iron maiden" -> "Iron maiden (disambiguation)" and "trivium" -> "Trivium (disambiguation)", and as the greater notability of either of the bands to the device/Latin word cannot be decided to provide a disambiguation in alphabetical order.
It was not vandalism, it is better to delete an erroneous link than to leave it there because you do not have time to write a whole page.
P.S. I was giving a reason for not responding to you for a while. ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 21:34, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
It is at the top of the page because it is the literal meaning. Same concept with iron maiden. That is what those two names originally mean. Anything else that is named after it should be included below. Franz Ferdinand is no different that an iron maiden. I am mentioning it because Franz Ferdinand is an archduke and happens to have a band named after it. An iron maiden is a torture device and happens to have a band named after it. Since the original meaning of "iron maiden" is a torture device, it should be included at the top of the page. When I include my PoV, I am trying to convince you that PoV doesn't make a difference. Just because you or me have different opinions about something, doesn't give it merit and I have as much opinion against your PoV as you do mine. That proves that my perceptions or yours have no merit. As for the disambiguation link 1. "iron maiden" is not ambiguous, however "Iron Maiden" is. The only object on the disambiguation page is the torture device. 2. The original meaning of "iron maiden" has been and always will be a torture device and just because a band names themselves after it doesn't make the apparatus inferior. As for the link, it is not necessarily erroneous since it goes to the iron maiden itself. Regardless, page blanking is vandalism. Plus, you had the ambition to write the Trivium (disambiguation) page. You could have done the same as iron maiden. How were your motivations different? As for your reasons for not responding for a while, I find it uneccesary to mention your personal affairs as it seems like you are just boasting about your hobbies. You don't need to mention why/that I wont hear from you for umpteen minutes.

Reginmund 22:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Please take further discussion here, I've responded at the bottom. ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 22:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:TriviumBandIn2006.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:TriviumBandIn2006.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 10:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:TwelveTribesBand.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TwelveTribesBand.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Leon Sword 21:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:TwelveTribesLive.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TwelveTribesLive.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Leon Sword 21:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivium