FromByond

Speedy undeletion part 2 of Fratricide (Band)

The article has been rewritten as that was faster, than waiting for a third party email.

I would be interested in knowing where supposedly the original article was, when the person put in for a "Speedy deletion" as to my knowledge it is only on the Vengence Records Recording Labels web sight. user:frombyond

www.fratricidemetal.com

Speedy undeletion of Fratricide (Band)

The material was written by a member of the band and I was asked to post it. To my knowledge we retain copyright control. I have sent an email, asking for verification and to have the copyright owner to send in a authorisation. As this could take several days, im working at rewriting the info. It may grow to the point, where a release wont be needed.

Speedy deletion of Fratricide (Band)

A tag has been placed on Fratricide (Band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Filpaul (talk) 02:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

I deleted your additions to black metal again. American black metal, although different from other countries (especially norwegian black metal) is not a subgenre, but more a cultural and slight musical difference. So-called "combat metal" is not a real genre nor a subgenre to black metal. If you want to add these things get citations and find some sources and have a conversation on the talk page of black metal. Navnløs (talk) 22:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Understood

I agree with USBM not being a sub genre. I agree completly with where the info was placed. Im still trying to get used to how the system here works, and its a bit overwhelming.

I disagree in Combat Black Metal not being a sub genre, though we are both allowed our opinions. If Combat Black Metal isnt a sub genre than neither is Unblack Metal nor Viking metal. Just because it doesnt have the amount of listeners, doesnt change it exists. I will follow your advice though, with finding citaions, and sources.

By all means, man. If you think it is a real genre and find legitimate evidence supporting this go for it. I think you may run into the same problem as "war metal", though. It is an arguable subgenre of black metal, but you won't find it there because it is, well, arguable. If you need help with anything feel free to ask me. Navnløs (talk) 22:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

You should also recognize that what constitues a genre or subgenre isn't simply its origin. For example, Swedish or Scandanavian death metal isn't a referred term just because it's FROM those places, but because a distinct musical style and aesthetic originated there as well. "USBM", to you, seems like a legit term because it in fact means black metal bands from the United States; that I get. But until such bands in question actually provide something new, an offshoot or notable separation from what black metal is and has always been, there's no term to be coined here. Subgenre titles aren't exclusive to a geographical context.

Additionally, the "combat metal" thing (whether you came up with it or perhaps some buddies you know did) lacks any kind of legit publication or otherwise cultural backup (for example, are there labels dedicated to just something called "combat metal", or are there "combat metal" festivals, etc). This goes hand in hand basically with what I said above about the USBM term; these labels aren't just thrown out there from nowhere. You need a good citation - other than a fan site or forum where anyone can write stuff - to back up this claim, and even then, something about the music (besides lyrical topics regarding "combat") needs to merit a seperate title. Otherwise, you could go as far as to give each song, let alone band, their own genre title.

Your edits are in good faith, however. I hope to see some constructive edits from you in the future. It's just you have some things to learn about Wikipedia and hopefully in time you'll get those things down. Thanks. Logical Defense (talk) 23:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Fratricide (band)

A tag has been placed on Fratricide (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sting_au Talk 22:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Fratricide (band)

I noticed that this article was (again) tagged for speedy deletion. Rather than deleting it for a third time, though, I wanted to move the article to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, which will allow other editors to add their opinion on whether it's something appropriate for Wikipedia - by doing this, there's a better opportunity to gain community consensus (rather than having one or two people delete the article unilaterally, which can be frustrating). When you get a moment, stop by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fratricide (band) to add your two cents. Tijuana Brass (talk) 23:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Fratricide (band)

A tag has been placed on Fratricide (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Funeral 22:37, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Fratricide (band)

The band's article has already been deleted once due to the failure to prove that it meets Wikipedia's band guideline at WP:BAND. It was recreated, and then deleted via Wikipedia's deletion process called AfD (articles for deletion). Now you've recreated it again. Please read WP:BAND. You must provide reliable sources to prove that the band meets Wikipedia's notability guideline, or else this article will be deleted again. Corvus cornix_talk 22:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. Thats more than most are willing to give of their time, as their to busy being Bias. FromByond (talk) 23:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

"Failing to satisfy the notability guidelines is not a criterion for speedy deletion"FromByond (talk) 23:37, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Failing to assert notability is. As is recreation of an article that's already gone through AfD. Corvus cornix_talk 23:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Correct, and the article does assert notability, now whether its contested or not is something differantFromByond (talk) 23:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

However you haven't addressed the situation where it's been deleted due to an AfD discussion. You also must provide neutral, third-party sources which prove your assertions (and where the band is the main focus of the article) to avoid having it being deleted again. Corvus cornix_talk 23:41, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I dont see how recreation has any bearing on anything. If someone writes an article, and doesnt understand the Wiki process, that means that article can than never been rewritten. Thats absurd. This is horribly challenging to figure out how to work within the guidelinesFromByond (talk) 23:41, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

"A mere claim of significance, even if contested, may avoid speedy deletion under A7, requiring a full proposed deletion or Article for Deletion process to determine if the article should be included in Wikipedia".FromByond (talk) 23:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 23:04, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!! YOur the first person to take the time to explain that to me.FromByond (talk) 23:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Black Metal

You need to STOP adding Fratricide to the black metal band page. They are not a notable USBM band on par with Xasthur and Leviathan. I can see that the article is already a candidate for speedy deletion, so there's absolutely no need to add them to the BM page. Scskowron (talk) 04:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I second this, and also hope you take the time to learn how to properly edit, review Wikipedia's criteria, and work on your grammar/sentence clarity before making further edits. Logical Defense (talk) 07:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Official Statement from Fratricide

Please note that the person associated with submitting this is no longer a member of Fratricide. He was never sanctioned by the band's founding members to proceed with this and we appreciate the actions taken to have the article deleted. This just came to light today and we were taken by surprise. Thank you for your time. --BotBattlefield (talk) 02:03, 5 January 2008 (UTC)