Talk:Tim Lambesis

"A Christian, his lyrics are personal..."

I don't care how common this style of writing is; it is completely and utterly non sequitur. It messes up the fluidity of any sentence from the get-go. How was this popularized to begin with? I can understand and accept it if we're trying to tell as much as possible with as little text as possible, but this is a fucking encyclopedia. Damn it. It's not a description on a business card.

Swiiman (talk) 16:04, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

"Lambesis is notable for his screamed vocals"

While I think I get what this means, it makes it sound like "screamed vocals" are oh so uncommon and he's one of few doing it, which certainly is not the case. If it now has to be mentioned, it should rather be something like "he mainly utilizes harsh vocals" or whatever, although it's not very noteworthy either way. And besides, even the "pussiest" of metalcore bands have SOME screaming, including Bullet for my Valentine. It's a part of the genre Tim Lambesis play...

Swiiman (talk) 15:58, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Untitled

Someone needs to make a seperate article on Austrian Death Machine, kthx.

He rocks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xwhitexstarx (talk • contribs) 16:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC) 

can we get some form of confirmation on that the link is really his blog? Is this really his blog an imposter? i think this needs some verification before its linked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.108.49.9 (talk) 10:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• Respectfully removing '09 tag. Article appears referenced and clean. Armorbearer777 (talk) 22:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Tim is Christian

His estranged wife, who is unemployed and wants $ from Tim, claims that Tim said to her that he doesn't believe in God. However, he has not made any public statements about not being Christian. He has Christian tattoos all over his body, he has a Bachelor's degree in Religious Studies from a Christian college, he is part of a Christian Metalcore band, etc. People can't just edit out that he's a Christian because he's been arrested. If that was okay, then every NBA athlete with five baby mamas who claim to be Christian would also have to have references to their belief in God edited out of their wiki pages... Lil Wayne's page plainly calls Lil Wayne Christian even though Lil Wayne [removed as per WP:BLP] See diff — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.97.170.229 (talk) 04:14, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

The statement about Lambesis' wife is unsupported, malicious and some sort of character assassination. I don't believe it.

The phrase that it was a claim is correct. There has been no public statement. What we have is a statement from the prosecution in which they claim that Lambesis has renounced his faith, but this has not yet been entered as evidence or confirmed by analysts. Unless further statements are provided, we can't modify the sentence.

Also, we won't change it to the past tense (was). Instead, we would have to change it to something like, "at one time Lambesis claimed that he was a Christian" and then later explain the change. Again, this would require support. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:23, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Tim has a tumblr. In a post, he says that after studying Religious Studies, he has found what he didn't want to find; that religion is illogical. Does that mean he is now not a Christian? Read here: http://timlambesis.tumblr.com/post/32380385279/clarification-on-a-greater-foundation I wrote the lyrics to A Greater Foundation as a way to process some of the religious beliefs from my childhood that I had let go in exchange for finding truth. Every year that I had put toward my degree in Religious Studies caused me to see the god of tradition and ritual that I grew up with as less and less of a probable truth. By the time I graduated, my entire concept of the divine had changed as I sought to reconcile spirituality and reason. The more I sought truth uncorrupted by years of religious history, the more I kept finding answers I didn’t want to find. Emotionally, it would have been easiest for me to just hold on to what I grew up believing, but mentally that wasn’t an option anymore. In other words, my dedication couldn’t have been more earnest, but heart wasn’t the issue. Though I had lost so much of my history and felt that my world was falling apart, that was a necessary step toward building my entire way of thinking on the absolute best possible foundation. The hope found in these lyrics is described in the aftermath of demolition for those willing to start from scratch. Unfortunately, most people accept what they have been taught by either their schools or churches without question. Overall, I know that I can do what’s best for myself and those around me by seeking truth above anything else, even when teachings claim to be from god. Education is not God, but truth certainly does set people free.

I believe that this is verifiably Tim Lambesis' tumblr because it's linked to on his Facebook page http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:pKQa9wny33EJ:www.facebook.com/timlambesisofficial/info+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a and his old blog links to it- http://timlambesis.blogspot.com/ 74.101.128.155 (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

The material itself is not the question. I believe it was already linked. Is there a point that you're trying to make? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:11, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Relevant information omitted from article: Lambesis no longer considers himself a Christian

Tim Lambesis no longer considers himself a Christian. Even if he did consider himself Christian, he wouldn't be considered a Christian in the regular sense of the word (we have definitions to define things to make sense of them...which is why there's no such thing as a "Christian Atheist").

Here's the relevant quote (taken from Tim's blog at http://timlambesis.tumblr.com/:

"The god I grew up learning about was more like a creation of the 4th century emperor Constantine than anything of 1st century Judeo origin. In fact, the book Pagan Christianity does a pretty good job showing that both Protestant and Catholic denominations have poisonous roots (though, I don’t agree with the books conclusions of how to deal with that problem). While I do not agree with any large religious institution, I do respect people who sincerely want to trace their beliefs down to their uncorrupted historical root. Men like NFL star Reggie White (at the end of his life) were persecuted for seeking what he believed to be as truth, yet the reality is that he got closer to understanding the Messiah that most refer to by the Greek name Jesus than almost any man I’ve seen stand behind a pulpit. There’s not a single human being who has it all right, but often those most sincere in their search for truth are the first to be considered heretics. Additionally, some great minds began their subversive thinking because they are slightly crazy (like Lew White for example). Then you have to separate brilliance from conspiracy. The point I’m getting to is that I don’t hate all religious belief, yet it is very difficult for me to outline exactly who it is that’s worth siding with. The line has been blurred, but one thing is certain. I am still inspired by the words of the man who told us to “love our enemies" and to serve “the least of these." Regardless of where a person stands religiously, that is simply a better way to live, full of compassion, and alleviating our selfish suffering as we put our energy into serving those worse off than ourselves."

and in HIS OWN WORDS (see list of sources below):

I grew up in a Christian home and held that belief myself for many years. In the process of sincerely trying to defend that belief in a scholarly way and shortly after finishing my degree, I felt that it was unreasonable to call myself a Christian in light of the evidence. Many AILD fans picked up on the not-so-subtle hints at my worldview change in a couple songs on Awakened. It was never really hidden. Anyway, after my incarceration I found myself re-evaluating topics that I had previously sworn I would never waste my time looking at again. Many can chalk that up as one point for pure boredom in an isolation cell, or you can look at it providentially as the needed circumstance and only possible way to get me to humble my mind.

This may not mean Atheism, but it probably at least means denying the divinity of Jesus.

Just because someone was brought up in a Christian household and refer to themselves as "Christian" in a "Religion?" check box, does NOT mean they fit that definition as it is currently understood. A lot of Atheists and Agnostics want to make the definition of Christianity: "If someone says they are Christian and the things they do are Christian then that is Christian," which is absolutely ridiculous. I could believe in a god, practice human sacrifice and call myself a Skeptic Atheist, but that certainly doesn't make me one.

69.114.11.47 (talk) 21:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Still no reference for those statements and as you state, neither is conclusive to him rejecting Christianity, only that he is rethinking what he has been taught about Christianity. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:12, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Do not edit my original title. The title is what it is for a reason. You editing it to "Christianity Again" makes it sound like this is just another tired argument. This is a talk page and this is my post - it's not for you to doctor and manipulate. The fact that Tim no longer refers to himself as "Christian" and says that he cannot logically do so IS relevant information for this article. I would change it myself if I knew how to. If you would have taken 30 seconds and Googled any part of the above quotations you would have easily found Tim's blog. He has since removed the second quotation. Tim saying "I felt that it was unreasonable to call myself a Christian in light of the evidence" means just that - he no longer considers himself a Christian. The man said it himself. End of discussion. If you'll actually read what he said, you'll see that it's not a "Christians have got Jesus wrong" sort of thing. For one, that would mean he should consider himself a truer Christian, and you'll notice that he cites "reason" and "evidence" as his motivating factors, not that other Christians don't know about the "real" or "historical" Jesus (thus making him not want to identify as such - which would be silly). Also, if you'll take the time to read the lyrics from "Awakened" you'll see that this isn't some "re-evaluating Christianity" thing, it's a "I'm no longer a Christian" thing.

69.114.11.47 (talk) 03:19, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

But it is a tired argument and it is about Christianity. Since you offered no support for these statements and the statements do not have him saying he's not a Christian there is 1) nothing relevant in it, 2) not really information and 3) there's nothing to neglect. People reevaluate all sorts of things without chucking them out. When you actually have relevant information that has been neglected, add it WP:BOLDly (with references) to the article. If it's removed at that point, the discuss it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:01, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Do not reword my post title. It is not for you to reword. This is a TALK page. For discussion. It is not for you to manipulate like an article page. There are posts and replies. Stop editing my posts or I will report your abuse.

Per Wikipedia Guidelines:

It is not necessary to bring talk pages to publishing standards, so there is no need to correct typing/spelling errors, grammar, etc. It tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. The basic rule—with some specific exceptions outlined below—is that you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission. Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page. Striking text constitutes a change in meaning, and should only be done by the user who wrote it or someone acting at their explicit request.

Editing—or even removing—others' comments is sometimes allowed. But you should exercise caution in doing so, and normally stop if there is any objection. Some examples of appropriately editing others' comments:

1. If you have their permission.

It is not a "tired argument," it's not an argument at all because it is Tim saying he no longer considers himself a Christian "based on the evidence." He never said he's "re-evaluating" his Christianity. In other words: He's not a Christian. It is not for you to decide Tim's Christianity. By the way, if you had actually read my post you would have seen the reason why I have not edited the original article.

Here's just a sampling of sources you could have found in under a minute:

http://propertyofzack.com/post/54886843212/tim-lambesis-aild-posts-blog-on-arrest-beliefs

http://www.metalinjection.net/latest-news/tim-lambesis-trial/as-i-lay-dying-frontman-tim-lambesis-issues-first-statement-since-arrest-responds-to-fan-comments

http://www.metalsucks.net/2013/07/08/as-i-lay-dyings-tim-lambesis-releases-retracts-statement/

http://kukqphoenix.com/tim-lambesis-of-as-i-lay-dying-releases-blog-entry-while-under-house-arrest/

http://blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=192191

http://www.altpress.com/news/entry/tim_lambesis_as_i_lay_dying_posts_blog_update_details_time_in_house_arrest

69.114.11.47 (talk) 08:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the refs, but the direct quotes are not listed in any of them. Even if they were, they do not support that Lambesis no longer considers himself a Christian. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:53, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

You're either a liar, or you simply don't give a damn about the argument presented. Every link, except the KUKQ link (oops), contains the quote in question:

I grew up in a Christian home and held that belief myself for many years. In the process of sincerely trying to defend that belief in a scholarly way and shortly after finishing my degree, I felt that it was unreasonable to call myself a Christian in light of the evidence. Many AILD fans picked up on the not-so-subtle hints at my worldview change in a couple songs on Awakened. It was never really hidden. Anyway, after my incarceration I found myself re-evaluating topics that I had previously sworn I would never waste my time looking at again. Many can chalk that up as one point for pure boredom in an isolation cell, or you can look at it providentially as the needed circumstance and only possible way to get me to humble my mind.

Tell me how Tim saying he's no longer Christian means he's still a Christian and I will take your argument seriously. I keep battering you with quotes and you fail to respond to any of them. You also seem to ignore the things I post and just pretend like it means something else. I don't know. One thing is for certain, you shouldn't be editing Wikipedia articles with such an attitude. First, you don't seem to know that editing talk page posts is wrong, and then you just ignore the arguments presented or pretend like I had meant something else. I'm sorry, but I will not go away and I will (probably soon) edit this article with a direct quote from Tim about him not considering himself a Christian anymore. If you want to delete it from the main page I will report you - it is extremely relevant information considering Christianity is probably one of the main things Tim gets identified with.

69.114.11.47 (talk) 04:05, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Tell me where he says he's no longer a Christian? I don't see it. "I felt that it was unreasonable to call myself a Christian in light of the evidence". Too many weasel words or conditional statements to be clear unless that's what you want to see in the statement. It's a fine line, but no one, not even he, has come out and used the terms that would be required. It's not even clear why the blog post was added or removed. Until it's perfectly clear the statements violate WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. I reverted the statements from the article for that reason. Feel free to take this to the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:16, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Tell me which words are weasel words (do you even know what a weasel word is?). Tell me how those statements, which are direct quotes, violate NPOV? You are not clear on anything you say. By the way, I worded my edits very carefully to only include the direct quotes and I did not say directly that Lambesis is no longer Christian, I merely quoted what he said in the matter - which is HIGHLY relevant. Calling Lambesis a Christian when he states plainly that he himself no longer considers himself a Christian is highly dishonest. You're literally bringing up bogus charges so you can keep your biased perspective. Not only did you demolish all of the fair edits about Lambesis' Christianity, you also destroyed all of the other information I added which has nothing to do with it. For example, in a section about tattoos you only allow information about one tattoo that he has ("rocker Jesus") when, if you'll actually watch the interview, he makes it quite plain that the other tattoos are just as important to him (he has his entire back covered by a samurai and tiger, for Pete's sake). You seem to have an axe to grind and have serious NPOV issues. It's almost like you want Tim Lambesis to conform to Walter Gorlitz's view of Tim Lambesis and you serially ignore anything that Tim has said in the past few months about his Christianity.

You take the issue to them since you clearly have the problem here. My edits were factual and did not contain personal statements or weasel words. I am going to revert my edits. I suggest you get an unbiased party in here to help judge the situation.

24.189.110.120 (talk) 22:12, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Sentencing details

In the "2013 solicitation of murder arrest" subsection, it is stated, "If found guilty, he could face a prison term of 3 to 9 years in the state of California." At the end of the section, however, it states he entered a plea deal and "received a reduced sentence of 9 years in prison." If the maximum sentence possible was 9 years, how does a 9-year sentence constitute a reduced sentence (not to mention, why would anyone accept a plea whose terms dictate the maximum possible sentence)?

The source for the first statement is a site called Metalcore.net, quite dubious as a legitimate news site IMO, so I'm tending to doubt the veracity of the first statement, but would still like to see clarification. 24.118.76.70 (talk) 04:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Blog post while on house arrest & reorganization

"While on bail Lambesis posted on his personal blog that after his incarceration he has been "re-evaluating topics", but it is unclear what those topics are and if they relate to his Christianity. The blog post was taken down shortly after to avoid misinterpretation of the content."

The bolded parts are purely speculative WP:POV, and are not cited anywhere in the given source (or any source). Per Wikipedia policy relating to biographies of living persons, they have been removed and replaced with a direct quote from the BLP subject's blog post. Please don't re-add the bolded parts. BLP rules (especially in the midst of a court case) are extremely serious.

Note that I would have no problem with moving around the existing cited material so that it forms a more cogent and readable article. I have done this myself in an effort to separate Lambesis' personal life section from the court case section as much as possible. As was, they heavily overlapped each other. If you want to improve on it, feel free, just no more uncited material. Thanks. Vintovka Dragunova (talk) 20:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Note that nowhere in the article does it state that Lambesis has stated he is "no longer a Christian" in precisely those words. So we're not going to haggle over that point. What I have done is quote him directly. Putting words in a BLP subject's mouth is against policy; so is deliberately taking words OUT of a BLP subject's mouth in a misguided effort at protecting him. Either one will be met with reversion. I have this page on my watchlist now. Thanks. Vintovka Dragunova (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I could not agree more, but I reverted your change. Would you like to discuss it now as was requested? Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:47, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Blanket reversion of cited content to your preferred version, especially one which uses uncited, POV statements in a BLP, is unacceptable, Walter. Frankly, your preferred edit is a gross piece of WP:POV. There is not a single line in my edit that is not directly quoted from Tim Lambesis himself. In yours, there are several. I have called in several members of WikiProject BLP to comment on this matter. Given your previous statements on this subject, I would urge you to bone up on Wikipedia's Policy Towards Biographies of Living Persons before you revert my edit again. Your preferred version is in violation. It's that simple. I understand you are a Christian with a strong interest in Christianity and Christian music topics, but none of that can trump BLP guidelines, nor does it justify the blanket reversion of cited, quoted content from the BLP subject in favor of a version (written by you) which puts words in the BLP subject's mouth that support a personal point of view.Vintovka Dragunova (talk) 04:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Furthermore, if you'd like to edit my post by moving portions around or changing the wording of the parts that are not directly cited quotations from the BLP subject, please feel free to do so! The part you're not allowed to do is simply delete those quotes which you don't agree with, in order to support a POV. Quotes from the BLP subject always trump personal speculation, and that doesn't belong on a BLP article anyway (much less one involving a contentious current event). Vintovka Dragunova (talk) 04:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

1. You have ignored WP:BRD.
2. You seem to be confusing WP:NOR and WP:BLP.
3. I have no "preferred version". I agree that the subject has not recanted his faith and that requires original research.
4. You have removed more material than is necessary. I will review and discuss here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• I am pleased that you wish to discuss the matter further. After your reversion of my message on your talk page (editsum: "Learn to read, please"), I assumed you were going to simply continue to revert.

1. My edit does not fall under WP:BRD, which in any case, is an essay, not a guideline or policy. It falls under WP:BLP, which I am not confusing with WP:NOR, and states (in part) that uncited, contentious statements on a biography of a living person must be removed at the earliest opportunity. I have done so. Were this an article on, say, frogs, the statements would fall under WP:NOR; in this case, a BLP of a person in the midst of a considerably publicized trial, those remarks are considerably more serious, and fall under BLP. Your "preferred version" (a term which I stand by, since you have made no substantive edits to it for some time, yours being the last edit to the page prior to my own) contains at least one of those, a fact which seems to bother you not at all, since it also contains none of the quotations from Mr. Lambesis which you find so personally objectionable. This is an unacceptable situation.
2. If there is any material I removed which can be directly cited per BLP, please restore it, post haste, and accept my apology for being hasty and rash. However, as far as I can tell, there is no such content, only removals of duplicate citations (the trial is a very well cited event), in addition to the glaring BLP violation speculating as to Mr. Lambesis' motivations and attitudes regarding his Christianity. I substituted direct statements from Mr. Lambesis, with no other commentary, which you then removed. Vintovka Dragunova (talk) 04:45, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

If you go to my talk page and edit it, you should see an edit notice. If you don't, get a different browser. Please read it and you'll understand my revert of that edit.

Again, you're ahead on edit war and yet you imply that I would be doing one. I can see you're a piece of work and this will be a long, protracted teaching lesson, but for now I've got things to do and I'll school you later. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Wow. Your comments are tremendously dismissive and insulting. "Piece of work", eh? You'll "school me later", will you? How very un-Christian! You reverted a biography of a living person to a version which clearly violates WP:BLP and were called out on your mistake. I choose to think of it as a mistake. You responded with ugliness and sneering contempt. The fact that you haven't yet restored your mistake speaks to your wisdom, as BLP is a great deal more serious than I think you realize. Perhaps you're familiar with the Siegenthaler incident? I can tell you that I have never even listened to a song by Mr. Lambesis' rock band, nor do I care what religion he is. I care about blatant BLP violations, and removing them immediately whenever they are found. Now why don't we continue this discussion as grown adults instead of dispensing schoolyard taunts? Other than cited quotes from Mr. Lambesis' own mouth, what content precisely do you object to? Vintovka Dragunova (talk) 05:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Vintovka Dragunova asked me to look over this article and dispute. I've made some improvements to the article, though I believe there may need to be some additional verification of citations, as one I happened to read over didn't match all of the information for which it was attributed. Regardless, the article is well sourced, so I have removed that tag. As there is an ongoing murder trial I added the current event tag. Aside from that and some minor cleanups, I made no substantive changes. There is, however, a glaring BLP violation in this article that needs to be addressed posthaste. Because this article is nearly void of the information that makes Lambesis notable (his AILD career, for starters), there is significant undue weight to the current criminal charges and trial.

Related, for the matter of the change in faith, Walter previously wrote:

"Also, we won't change it to the past tense (was). Instead, we would have to change it to something like, "at one time Lambesis claimed that he was a Christian" and then later explain the change. Again, this would require support."

— Walter Görlitz (talk) 10:23 am, 13 May 2013, Monday (9 months, 18 days ago) (UTC−4)

That standard has been met with the tumblr posts by the subject, so the information is appropriate for the article. However, according to WP:BALASPS, the depth of detail should align with the significance of the matter in the subject's life. That considered, the details for both sides of the faith issue (his early statements regarding his faith and his later statements regarding his loss of faith) need to be trimmed.

The addition of a section on his career will allow for the expansion of other information. Also, the lead of the article is supposed to be a summary of the body. How this glaring omission of the most basic and key details of his life for the matter of notability have been allowed to remain absent from the article is beyond my comprehension. Please see Maynard James Keenan as an example of a musician biography. Lara 07:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Years active as a result of conviction

Do we mark his years active as "2001–present" or "2001–2014". The implication of the former option is that his incarceration has not ended his career, simply slowed it or made it more difficult for him to continue. It certainly will not continue in the same was as it was before the trial. The implication of the latter is that he no longer has a band, he's behind bars, and so he's no no longer active and if he continues to perform music after his release, we start a new range. The only reason I have been keeping it as 2001–present is that he has not made a statement that his career is over nor has any reliable source. We can't assume that his career is over we need either a verifiable source or preferably a reliable source that states he's on hiatus, or has ended his career. We have statements that he is continuing with his band and that As I Lay Dying is simply on hiatus(http://www.theprp.com/2014/04/09/news/as-i-lay-dying-officially-on-hiatus-band-members-confirm-new-projects/) and Austrian Death Machine have completed an album without him (http://loudwire.com/tim-lambesis-austrian-death-machine-release-details-triple-brutal/) but nothing similar to that specific to Lambesis. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:19, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Contradiction

The article claims it has been reported that Lambesis has reverted to Christianity, but he is categorized as an atheist & lapsed Christian. These can't both be true. Suggest removing the categories until the issue is cleared up. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 03:29, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

His band-mates in As I Lay Dying came out and said Lambesis has once again become Christian. However, and this is even a part of their statement, we cannot add that information until an official statement is made firsthand by Lambesis himself, or something a little bit more reliable, as per this. The last we heard from Lambesis himself is that he has renounced his belief in Christianity. TomUSA 02:09, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Trial of Tim Lambesis

Should there be article for his trial? It seems that it was infamous enough for there to be an entire article about it. Metalworker14 (Yo) 7:50, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

There's enough there for a stand-alone article. Yeah. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tim Lambesis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.wdbj7.com/news/sns-ap-us-metal-singer-murder-for-hire-20130507,0,2889401.story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110207165451/http://podcast.fullarmorradio.com/2010/08/13/as-i-lay-dying.aspx to http://podcast.fullarmorradio.com/2010/08/13/as-i-lay-dying.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130508105143/http://timlambesis.tumblr.com/post/32380385279/clarification-on-a-greater-foundation to http://timlambesis.tumblr.com/post/32380385279/clarification-on-a-greater-foundation

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

"Instruments"

He literally, besides doing vocals, plays lead/rhythm guitar, bass guitar, and drums on the Austrian Death Machine records, or at least records them all in the studio. He also played and recorded the keyboard parts in some As I lay Dying Records, therefore every one of these instruments should be listed and not just vocals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810B:F40:508:3D45:92D7:F26C:1A50 (talk) 07:53, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

From Template:Infobox musical artist#instrument: "Instruments listed in the infobox should be limited to only those that the artist is primarily known for using. The instruments infobox parameter is not intended as a WP:COATRACK for every instrument the subject has ever used." The AILD albums do not list him has playing those instruments so you appear to be mistaken. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Born Through Fire

no mention of this project at all anywhere on the page? 94.1.172.43 (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2024 (UTC)