Talk:Danger Days: The True Lives of the Fabulous Killjoys/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Added a redirect

Just to make things easier —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yh BLAZED (talk • contribs) 09:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

It was Danger Days by the way Yh BLAZED (talk) 13:51, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Brig135, 23 November 2010

Please change "Their guide is pirate radio DJ Dr. Death Defying, played by Steve Righ?." to "Their guide is pirate radio DJ Dr. Death Defying, played by Steve Montaño."

This is listed in the booklet of the CD itself Q. Does The Great Greene Blob Know He Keeps Switching Between First and Third Person When Talking About Himself? A. Yes, The Great Greene Blob Knows He Keeps Switching Between First and Third Person When Talking About Myself 18:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, Montaño is probably more commonly known as "Steve, Righ?" so I feel that should still be mentioned at least somewhere in the article. What if it were rephrased as, "Their guide is the pirate radio DJ named Dr. Death Defying who is voiced by Steve Montaño, and is also known by the stage name "Steve, Righ?" when performing with Mindless Self Indulgence." Would that make for a fair compromise? Fezmar9 (talk) 19:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

My bad: I didn't know his real name (but I do now!) I'll edit it to his real name but link it to the Steve, Righ? section on the MSI page. Is that fair? DeathBySoliloquy (talk) 19:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Well it should probably be mentioned that Steve also plays in MSI, and MSI should be linked. So if you were to link to the section in MSI about Steve AND the MSI article in general, that really wouldn't make sense. It would make for a redundant link. I would leave Steve's name unlinked in this situation. Fezmar9 (talk) 20:06, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

"Steve, Righ?" = stage name while playing with MSI? Then shouldn't the article state "Steve Montaño" as the booklet does as he isn't playing with MSI on this CD and so isn't known by his stage name? Nitromaster (talk) 21:05, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

He should be mentioned throughout the article body as Steve Montaño, but it probably needs to be mentioned somewhere in the article that he also goes by this stage name occasionally. I have known MSI for years and years, and I personally never knew that was his real name. It could grab the attention of a reader that might know him better by his stage name, and it could also inform an unfamiliar read about who he is. Like a brief background. But because this is not an article about MSI, his birth name should be used in the rest of this article outside of this one sentence. Fezmar9 (talk) 21:12, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Genre

I added punk rock to the genre because this album has many elements of classic punk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devil to the metal666 (talk • contribs) 08:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Let's just leave it at "Alternative rock", like it's been for a while now. We shouldn't go to a bunch of trouble listing a bunch of arbirtrary subgenres that are just going to cause genre-warring. I think we can all agree that "Alternative rock" describes the album in one way or another, and it's the only genre that covers the whole album, not just some songs or elements, in my opinion. So for now, I'd prefer to just keep "Alternative rock" as a default when users inevitably replace it with "emo" or "post-grunge" or "polka fusion" or whatever they personally are set on. Does anyone here have any more opinions on this? Per WP:SOFIXIT, I'm just going to keep the infobox genre at "Alternative rock" if it gets altered any time soon, but if anyone has any opinions on the matter I'd appreciate it. Friginator (talk) 19:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Alternative rock is probably the main genre of this album. If we want to get more in depth, we could say punk or pop-punk, or maybe progressive rock. Rocker10000 (talk) 12:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Shooter Jennings

Shooter Jennings has made some pretty serious charges about the album which I have added to the page. I feel that this information belongs here, but there should be some discussion of where and how. BillyJack193 (talk) 23:06, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

This could belong here if it gets some sort of media attention and some third-party sources publish information about this. But as it stands, it's just some artist complaining though his Twitter account. According to WP:TWITTER, personal blogs and Twitter accounts are generally unacceptable sources, and "if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so." If this gets attention from outside sources, then it may be acceptable to add this information. Fezmar9 (talk) 23:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Adding Bob Bryar in personnel?

In the lyric book, it does cite him as a co-writer for many songs. Maybe credit him as drum arrangements? or something, he deserves something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.33.173 (talk) 02:33, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, since I'm a new user and can't edit the article, can someone credit him has "Co-writer"? Yh BLAZED (talk) 13:57, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Messy

This article looks very messy with three infoboxes and a ratings template. If the single and EP are to be merged here, they don't necessarily need to have the infobox with them. Fezmar9 (talk) 00:48, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I merged the EP into prose as the infobox wasn't really needed. Also with 'The Only Hope...' i merged that into the Promotion section as that did not need it's own infobox, added sources as well. I couldn't find any mention of it being a single either, and so i removed all references for that also. Also removed a review that was unsourced. I hope the page looks a little less messy now! Grey Matter (talk) 01:43, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I don't see a problem with the page. However, to address Fezmar9's concerns, can I suggest having the ratings template be hidden by default and have the last infobox (and the relevant section) moved further down the article? I think this is best to try to retain as much content as possible. – Zntrip 07:03, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Infoboxes are really for giving a brief overview to a single article, they really aren't meant for giving additional information to back up two sentences about a merged release. All of the details within the infobox could be stated in prose, and the covers (provided they have been uploaded properly) could remain as thumbnails next to the relevant info. All the content currently added will be retained. Unless you go into detail about these releases and give them their own well-structured section, as seen on Against Me! as the Eternal Cowboy, it really doesn't make sense for the song infobox to bleed into the references, and the EP infobox to bleed into the track listing. Fezmar9 (talk) 19:19, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

That's understandable. I don't see either sections growing beyond what they are now. I wouldn't object to removing the infoboxes as long as the images and all the relevant information is retained within the article. – Zntrip 21:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I would definitely remove The Only Hope for Me is You. It seems like it's only tagged on because it didn't warrant its own page, rather than being a major aspect of the album. "The Mad Gear and Missile Kid" is different. It's very tied-in with the album itself. I'm fine with keeping it, though it does make the article a bit confusing. If it's going to stay, its track listing should at least be below the album's track listing. Friginator (talk) 23:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

S/C/A/R/E/C/R/O/W Single?

Anyone have any sources for this? There hasn't been anything about it on their official website, Myspace, or Facebook.Supahshadow (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Haven't heard that. And until we have a reliable source saying that it's going to be released as a single, we shouldn't mention it as such. Friginator (talk) 23:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

All right. I was going to get rid of it if no one found a source, but that's already been done.Supahshadow (talk) 00:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

? Excuse me? THIS IS WIKIPEDIA.

Sorry people, admin, and others, but in this space, there are 3 articles: Danger Days: The True Lives of the Fabulous Killjoys (THE ARTICLE), The Mad Gear and Missile Kid (EP, different tracklist, cover art, date release, charts), and single article "The Only Hope for Me Is You" (It has "Chart" now), It has happened the time already, they should locate well these articles, wikipedia must be organized by it. --UltraHeadShot (talk) 00:35, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree the page seems a bit...messy, but neither the EP nor "The Only Hope" is notable enough to warrant their own article, hence why there are included here. Grey Matter (talk) 01:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

 Fixed –Fezmar9 (talk) 01:29, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3