Talk:Lordi/Archive 2

Stubs created on other members.

I have created stubs on all the members of Lordi that didn't have articles exept for Ox: I haven't seen the sources for his real name, so I'll hold off writing a stub until I see them. Duke toaster 16:59, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather see articles created for the band characters, not the people behind them. They prefer anonymity and most of them don't have notability beyond Lordi.--JyriL ^talk 20:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

IMO they are notable. And it doesn't matter if they prefer anonymity. Besides, they don't have it any more, do they Duke toaster 10:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

GWAR have their members under their stage name, so I think Lordi should to

The articles have redirect pages with the bandmembers name. Or at least Ox does, I made it. skorpion 22:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

IMO they are notable. BUT they have stage names, they use them in interviews. We should respect their wishes, what is the point of us knowing their real names. They asked to not have their personal lives intruded. What if we wind up with another car crash like France on our hands? And we've all seen the papers about the pictures used in an Italian magazine. I will not allow their real names to be posted, I will come back and delete them til they are all gone. Even if it takes me a year —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.160.206 (talk • contribs)

You will likely be blocked if you continue to remove information from the article. ... discospinster _talk 01:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Likely to? I know I have the potential to be. but if GWAR's members are under their stage names, why not Lordi's?

The real names of GWAR members are mentioned in their article. ... discospinster _talk 02:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes but Lordi have specifically stated, even in the Lordi entry in Wikipedia its mentioned, that they do not wish to be identified. THats including names, pictures, etc etc. Bit contradictory the Lordi entry isnt it?

No. We record what they want but we don't have to do what they want.Geni 11:25, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually if you're recording what THEY want, dont you then have to allowe them some priovacy? Or has the Human Rights Act not been put into use here? ARTICLE 8 RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE 1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. This is what I'm on about, so by posting their real names isnt it a contravention of the Human Rights Act? (UKLFC 12:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC))

1.Wikipedia ia based in the US. 2.The names are already in the public domain and three No legal threats.Geni 12:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Not a legal threat, im just stating a fact. Its also under Article 12 of the Universal Human Rights Act signed by all member states of the United Nations. If it was a legal threat, it wouldnt just be a bit about Human Rights. Hunam Rights are to be respected at all times, within a legal contect or not, and you're not respecting someones human rights? Also the names havent ben put in the public domain by the band themselves. Different matter if they had, BUT they havent (UKLFC 13:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC))

Well as and when someone comes up with a mechanism to drag us off to some kind of international court we will start to worry. Wikipedia is not a country. It doesn't apply to us.

Wikipedia is still held under international law isnt it? Laws do still apply here? If they havent given their names then why are they being posted? Just cos they are in the public domain, and neither confirmed or denied by the member,s they should be removed UNTIL confirmation by members has been given (UKLFC 13:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC))

The laws of the US state of florida. The sources of the information are pretty solid.Geni

But shouldnt the info come from the members themselves? And the state of Florida still hae to acknowledge international law that overrules Florida law does it not? (UKLFC 13:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC))

We take info from where ever we can get it. As for your attempt to apply the UN convention of human right please don't. you have said it isn't a legal threat so it doesn't matter.Geni 14:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Net sites still have to stick to the laws, part of the contract with the site hosts and the isps isnt it? So yeah the laws DO apply (UKLFC 15:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC))

So you are makeing a legal threat? In any case since wikipedia's site host and ISP is the wikimedia foundation perhaps you would like to talk them them.Geni 16:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not a legal threat, as nowhere does he say that he will sue (and he even explicitly says he's not making a legal threat). What he's asking (or wants to ask) is whether the international law also applies in Florida, and whether Wikipedia follows those laws. It's a reasonable thing to ask, as that's where Wikipedia's main servers are based, and ignoring the law often has unwanted consequences. AFAIK there is no blanket policy of following the law, only policies about copyright, slander and libel, and in this case the chances of getting sued seem remote anyway. I'm not sure what either of you mean by the names being in public domain, as I'm not aware of any intellectual property laws that apply to people's names. -- Coffee2theorems | Talk 11:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, It has been a while and the page has grew alot now but I would like to ask if a kind person of Wikipedia can post the main reason why Wikipedia will try to keep the alleged band members names published on the page so to speak. I feel there is alot of unwanted attention to the article both by Lordi fans (Monstermaniacs) and Wikipedia (Moderators I presume). If there is a valid legal or otherwise "good enough" reason for the alleged names to stay here then I believe we can finaly calm down the dispute over the page once and for all. Beauty of the Beast 19:58, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The information is relivant. It is reasonably noteable. We can source it. And people are interested in it (that last one isn't actualy required for inclusion in wikipedia but it is nice if they are). Wikipedia hosts content that quite a lot of people find far more upseting (eg this).Geni 00:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Has it actually been confirmed or denied by any of Lordi themselves? If it hasn't then should it really be on here until it is confirmed? And if it has/hasnt been confirmed then shouldnt it be noted? (UKLFC 19:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC))

No International Privacy law broken! this is an Encyclopedia so facts are written! If Only things were written in these biographies that the people in the biographies wanted written, it would not be much of an encyclopedia! AAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGG--MadDogCrog 11:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Similar bands

According to this section, Lordi is similar to six american bands and one australian band. Why? They don't sound american at all. Either we should carefully make this section unbiased, or we should remove it. I vote for removing it. --PsySine

I also think its the best to remove the section, most band articles don't have such a section. Surak 21:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I removed the section. The band's strong Kiss influence is obvious from the article itself anyway. Pasi 01:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I think removal of this section is also a good idea. but now there is no reference to GWAR which is the one Original "Foam Latex Theatrical Heavy Rock Band". I think some historical reference is appropriate and worthwhile for any researcher. actually I think reference to other theatrical bands would be appropriate too like Oingo Boingo.--MadDogCrog 07:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Listing similar 'theatrical' bands makes more sense than just listing similar bands in general anyway. The GWAR reference is probably a good idea. Pasi 20:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Real Names

Thanks for adding Ox's. Will write stub on Ox. Duke toaster 10:21, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Kalma´s real name is Pekka Tarvanen. I found that on the finnisch wiki-site. Can somebody registered put it in the text please? --89.58.21.122 17:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Please Sign Your Comments

Just an observation : why do so few people sign their comments on this talk page? Duke toaster 10:22, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

New editors tend to not knwo how to do so.Geni 11:25, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I added {{talkheader}}, maybe that will help. —♦♦ SʘʘTHING^(Я) 13:50, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Kalmas real name is NOT Pekka Tarvanen. Not sure where ya heard that from.

Rovaniemi

Only Mr. Lordi is originally from Rovaniemi. All the members live in Southern Finland, in Helsinki or nearby. Kita's from Vantaa, Ox's from Espoo (both sister cities or suburbs of Helsinki), Amen's from Mäntsälä and Axa's from Porvoo. --Lalli 18:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

And Rovaniemi isnt in Finland, its one of the largest cities in Lapland (UKLFC 12:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC))

Rovaniemi is within the Finnish border though. It is in the Laplands. (Beauty of the Beast)

Rovaniemi certainly is in Finland, as Rovaniemi is the capital city of Lapland Region, being located in the Finnish Lapland. The Laplands in general are the historical living area of the Sami people, but there is no independent state or country of Lapland. Instead, the Lapland area is divided between Finland, Norway, Sweden and Russia. They all have their own Laplands. Finnish Lapland and Rovaniemi are inhabited by the Sami and non-Sami people, Mr. Lordi being a non-Sami (in other words, he's a regular Finn). Before Mr. Lordi and his victory in Eurovision contest, the most exciting thing in the history of Rovaniemi was the Burning of Lapland in 1945 in Lapland War (between Finland and Germany), when the escaping German army burnt the whole city to the ground. 62.183.220.246 16:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Rovaniemi isn't in Finland? That's one of the funniest things I've heard on Wikipedia in a long time. It's like saying Lappeenranta isn't in Finland because it's in Karelia. Or perhaps even like saying Helsinki isn't in Finland because it's in Nylandia. UKLC, have you ever even visited Rovaniemi? JIP | Talk 11:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The lyrics

The lyrics as given on the Eurovision site contain one doubtless mistake and one probable mistake.

1. The word "thyn" does not exist in English. "Thy" and "thine" do exist, however.

2. "The true believers / Thou shall be saved" does not make much sense. Having listened to the song carefully and several times over, I think it might be "Now shall be saved." Which makes perfect sense. However, it is difficult to tell: the word "Thou" or "Now" is drowned in the music.

OK, but what's this got to do with the Wikipedia article? — Matt Crypto 07:33, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Nothing to do with this article. Complain to eurovision if you really want to get worked up about it Duke toaster 10:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually "The true believers, thou shall be saved" is correct. "Thou" is (roughly) "you" so it would be "The true believers, you shall be saved." Also, thyn IS in the English Language and would be found under OE (Old English) or ME (Middle English). Google "thyn" if you don't believe me. Having said this, I agree that it is not relevent to the article, I just thought I'd clear that up.

(P.S. Even more correct would be "thou shalt be saved". Damn, now I'm off-topic too!) — Matt Crypto 08:28, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

It's an old trick of the 70s Finnish rock'n roll. Some strange words in lyrics written in English. Listen 'Get on' by Hurriganes or parody of this: 'Friduna Skikuna' by Hullujussi. Some say the 'Get on' lyrics are a bad example of the band's skill of English. But a brit, Richard Stanley was responsible of the lyrics then. --Lalli 15:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Questionable footnote

The footnote for "Vote for Lordi" is a link to what seems to be a poorly written personal webpage. Is that really something that should be a reference? 216.36.157.91 17:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I guess it's not as much reference as it is an example. It goes to show that the "Lordi should not allowed to compete" movement may have resulted in people voting for Lordi in protest. I guess some Greek person could tell us if that website was in wide circulation inside Greece during the contest (in which case, it is relevant. If it's just a random pick, then I don't know). Pasi 23:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

There are non-Greek metal bands that a large, or even their largest base of fans exist in Greece. e.g. The American Iced Earth or the German Blind Guardian (which may answer in part why Greeks' 12 points went to Lordi), plus, various bands that can't be easily considered "christian". Generally liberal ideas are strong, especially because we had a dictatorship between 1967-74 (which was partly backed by the church). However, at the same time, religion is influencial. Schools are still teaching theology, which in early years is on christianity (at least I think in high school it goes into other religions). But gradually, church's influence is getting less and less, e.g. it was just a couple of months ago ridiculed 24/7 by certain matters on the Press. However, it is a country where none of that turns into physical conflict (greeks are usually not afraid to go public with their ideas, however stupid they may be), it's mostly strong talk flying from one side to the other, and younger generations (18-30), don't seem to have the strong feelings towards religion our parents have.

'Unmasked by Media'

If someone can come up with a better name for this section, please do change it. I belive the separation is necessary tho; the three last paragraphs of the costumes section are clearly about the media response to the costumes, not the costumes themselves. Pasi 00:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

-- The part where it says there appear four men and one woman in the Luthianian video is wrong. The video shows five men. - SWEVEN

Lead

I think we need to work on the article's lead. Problems: - "They are mostly known for their unusual monster costumes and lyrical themes." This isn't really true anymore. True, the next sentence mentions the Eurovision Song Contest but it's a new paragraph. I'd like to find a way to say that the contest introduced Lordi to a lot of people who had not heard about them earlier. All this needs to maintain a NPOV of course. - "Some controversy with the band does exist, however. Many members of the metal community see Lordi's use of monster costumes as a knockoff of the band GWAR, which has used similar costumes for years." This doesn't really belong to the lead, does it?

Also, what happened to the controversy section? Nothing in talk, no relevant subjects in history? Pasi 15:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I reverted several edits back (several sections had been deleted), but didn't look closely at the article. You may want to take another look at it now. up+land 15:46, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

GWAR

"Let it be noted that Lordi probably got all their inspiration from Shock Rock group GWAR." doesn't (in my opinion) maintain a NPOV. I edited it a bit but the GWAR bit is still lacking reference. Pasi 19:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

A lot of "fanboys" of GWAR are claiming this but Lordi couldn't be more different from GWAR. As stated by Mr. Lordi himself, they wanna be like Kiss just with bigger and better costumes. Any quote of the kind should be removed as I would be amazed if GWAR had even been released in Finland in 1992 when the idea for Lordi began.

I think the current wording is good. It mentions GWAR, but it also makes it clear the the band hasn't 'confirmed' any sort of influence. The "many believe" bit is a fact, considering that people insist the article mentions GWAR and so. In other words, the current wording maintains a NPOV and only includes hard facts. Pasi 05:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Have any of you seen GWAR? Lordi is so similar to them in appearance it's insane. It's clear that they totally ripped off GWAR's costumes. Just look at the masks worn by the singers of both bands. GWAR should at least be listed as a stylistic influence of Lordi.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.159.248.74 (talk • contribs)

Mr. Lordi has stated in an interview that they had no influence from GWAR, Mr. Lordi has never heard of them until he was asked about the similarities the bands shared. Mr. Lordi has stated that all their influence was from bands like KISS and Alice Cooper. He also noted that films like The Evil Dead were big influences in the costume design. (Beauty of the Beast)

Genre

(Ugh, I've soon started half of these subtopics on the talk page. Someone stop me)

There seems to be a minor edit was going on about the band's genre. Someone might categorise some of it as vandalism, but let's assume good faith: can't we simply have all heavy metal, glam rock and hard rock listed as genres? It's not like Lordi would be the first band in Wikipedia with several genres. There definitely are aspects of all these genres in Lordi's music. Editing back and forth between them is going to just confuse people and make Wikipedia look silly.

There's a reason the infobox says "Genre(s)". My 'proposal' is to leave the lead as it is ("Lordi is a heavy metal band") and list the other genres in the infobox. It's not like there's an Ultimate Authority that categorises music and will say the final word. Pasi 09:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

We already did the genre thing, check the talk archives. The fact of the matter is Lordi say they are hard rock as opposed to heavy metal, and the music they play is more akin to hard rock than heavy metal (of which Judas Priest is a prime example.)--Pypex 00:01, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Former members

Umm, who is G-stealer? I haven't ever heard of him and I Google is not helping. Could someone verify that he really exists? 80.186.62.184 13:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Reverted. The name has been added to the section twice now with no explanation, first by Sami73 (talk • contribs) and second by 82.181.151.72 (talk • contribs) (a cable modem IP in Helsinki). Neither has made any other contributions to Wikipedia. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 14:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Centurion Ry 19:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Lordi and religion?

Several people have been insisting to me that Lordi are a christian band. I haven't seen any reliable source for or against this, but I've been told that they said so on their official site. Can someone verify or disprove this information, please? IronChris | (talk) 14:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The band members are definitely christian but I don't think their music is. I would not say that the BAND is christian. 84.230.70.75 12:28, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

In fact I really miss some information on christian-conservative criticism and arousal. Should be relevant, because it almost made Lordi be replaced by another band in the EuroVisionContest, but I don't know that for sure (It was in the German Wikipedia).--StalkerAT 11:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

There was no actual controversy in Finland. Internet trolls and angry fans of the artist that lost to Lordi on the national final were well exploited by tabloids. These co-called "religious leaders" mentioned in the article were some (or only one?) poor priests tabloid magazines also managed to dig up somewhere (to get some "Lordi must be banned" headlines). So, Lordi were not "almost replaced by another band". Regarding the band's Christianity, I caught an interview with Putaansuu on Finnish TV and he said something like "I think everyone of us is either an atheist or a Christian". Prolog 14:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Please see Lordi is not a satanistic band, lower in this forum.

The members are christian, the only songs that can be though of to be chirstian are probably "Hard Rock Hallelujah" and "Devil is a Loser".

Merge notice

A request has been made that the article Blood red sandman be merged with this page. I didn't add the tag, I just found it. Discuss. --Rayc 18:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. Why should we merge? I see absolutely no reason. There are plenty of articles for songs, there's no policy in Wikipedia that says that separate articles can't be made for songs. Besides, if we merge the material from Blood red sandman here, we will then have to make a section for all the other songs of Lordi, which is of course out of the question. There is no way that we can merge that material into this article. So, why merge? IronChris | (talk) 18:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

oppose--MadDogCrog 03:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

This article is not particularly long. It would make sense to have the information in this article. Thus merge. -- Geni 03:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Merge. Wikipedia:Notability (songs) sets out the criteria for songs having their own articles. This particular song plainly doesn't meet any of those criteria. "Hard Rock Hallelujah" would, though. -- ChrisO 16:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose as per Wikipedia:Notability (songs). In contrary to what ChrisO stated, the article does meet the guidelines (which is nothing more than a proposal anyway). If you take a look at the German article, you'll see that Blood Red Sandman reached the 17th spot in the Finnish charts...which is at least a mediumsized country.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING^(Я) 15:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. The song appears to meet notability guidelines. I can see no valid reason to merge. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 15:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Merge. There's nothing special about that song that warrants its own article. The.valiant.paladin 20:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. "Has been downloaded a high number of times through digital download websites" -> Blood Red Sandman music video has altogether over 500,000 views on Youtube. Prolog 09:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Merge Prolog, meeting just ONE of the criteria on the second list of Wikipedia:Notability (songs) is not good enough grounds for inclusion. It does not meet number 3 of that list either as it is not their "signature song". The song should be merged as per ChrisO and Wikipedia:Notability (songs) --Nayl 12:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment. I believe it also fills the first criterion [1], as mentioned by SoothingR, but I guess that just depends on whether one sees Finland as a small or medium-sized country. Prolog 14:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. I think that the song is notable, especially given the fact that it is one of their few songs, for which a video has been made. RedvBlue 17:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Links

Can someone add this link : http://lordi-france.fr.tc Its a french lordi homepage. thanks ! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.250.199.123 (talk • contribs) 09:24, July 16, 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid not, links to fanpages are not be added to the links-section. I'm sorry.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING^(Я) 15:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify a little, you may like to read Wikipedia is not repository of links. The External links guide states that "on articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate." However, your site is in French and the Manual of Style states that because this is the English Wikipedia, English links are preferred. I personally do not think your link should be included, partly because it is not in English and partly because it does not look like it has encyclopedic merit. Perhaps you could try the French Wikipedia? Cheers. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 15:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

How about adding http://www.lordifans.com then? It's a fairly large US based Lordi fansite. Herrinz 02:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I actually did add Lordifans since it seems to match your requirements set forth above. "on articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate." It is a US based fan site very much in line with the page topic Herrinz 03:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I see that the link to lordifans.com has been removed already. Is there some reason? Herrinz 14:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Lordi is not a satanistic band.

Lordi has commented, that if they were an satanistic band. They would not have made tracks like Devil is a loser and Hard Rock Hallelujah. Hit it!

Um yes? It says that on the article. Or did I miss your point? (ps. you can sign your comments by using four tildes (~)). Pasi 16:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Santa claus

Someone knowledgeable should add to the article about mr. Lordi playing Santa Claus on Finnish television.

Shouldn't that go to Mr. Lordi article, not Lordi? Pasi 13:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Unverified names

The names are unverified information. They are simply rumors from the same newspapers that came up with the Children of Bodom pics and thus have proven to be unreliable. Wikipedia is not a collection of rumors. Until there is exact proof of the names they don't belong here. -- 80.200.86.25 14:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

They are verifiable enough. Besides, the article states "These real names have been neither confirmed nor denied by the band", so readers are aware that the band itself do not acknowledge these names. Futhermore, why did you bring up all that "Human Rights violation" if it's not their real names? The.valiant.paladin 15:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Because there are people with those real names who are now getting attention for something they hold no part in, or at least no verifiable part in. -- 80.200.86.25 15:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Then these people must speak up and declare that they hold no part in Lordi. The.valiant.paladin 15:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I happen to believe all of Western society is based on innocent until proven guilty? Same applies here. Until you have proof those are their names you have no way of claiming they are, yet you turn it around completely. I still have not seen any of those "references" either. -- Mr0x 15:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

<after ec> This has nothing to do with guilt v innocence. We're reporting what has been reported elsewhere. We don't need to prove that those names are fact to claim that is what the media has reported. And by the way, I find it curious that you signed up for an account minutes after the person you're agreeing was told they had been reported for breaching WP:3RR and WP:NPA. If you have created an account to dodge policy, you can be reported for checkuser. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 15:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

If you want to remove that information, you need to reach consensus with the other editors here instead of trying to ride roughshot over everyone. The article cites references and, as Valiant points out, makes it clear that the band has not confirmed the information. From a quick scan of the page, at least one administrator has affirmed inclusion of the names. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 15:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Guilt? Since when has it been a crime to be a member of Lordi?The.valiant.paladin 15:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I still don't see any references which prove it's their names anywhere in the article after reading it completely through as Sarah seemed to point at. Any more detailed point to where is the reference for their names? -- Mr0x 15:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

AFAIK, these names are the names of Lordi's members according to the best of our knowledge. If you know better, please share your information.The.valiant.paladin 15:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

? Do I know better? I don't know their real names, neither do I care to know. But I do know better than to pollute the Wiki with unverified information. "To the best of our knowledge" for some reason I don't recall being a valid source. -- Mr0x 15:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

As Sarah points out, we're just reporting what everybody else are reporting. Sure, it would be nice if the band confirmed or denied these names, but until that happens these names are the best information we can get. With the notification of the names unconfirmed status, of course.The.valiant.paladin 15:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

What I was referring to earlier, burden of evidence, apparently is a rule on Wikipedia itself even. Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence and Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence_in_biographies_of_living_persons The part afterwards, about unreliable sources specifically mentions tabloids also, like the ones the pictures are from, and thus I -assume- until a better source is given, also the "real names" -- Mr0x 16:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence_in_biographies_of_living_persons is to prevent the spread of smearing. The justification is "...might negatively affect someone's life and could have legal consequences." Names alone are not smearing, have no legal consequences and do not "negatively affect someone's life". As to the burden of proof, we are just reporting what others report. That some media report that thoose names are the names of the members of Lordi are a fact in and of itself, and until we have better sources that's the information we use.The.valiant.paladin 16:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I've tried to tighten the references. There are numerous newspaper articles in the database and websites which refer to the band members by name.

In future I'd appreciate it if you would follow policy, refrain from edit-warring with numerous editors and from posting abusive and slanderous comments on my talk page. It is very counter-productive and won't get you what you want. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 18:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe we should move those references to the members' own articles. That way we could keep the footnotes of the main article bit tidier. Alternative would of course be to just mention the reference once. :) Pasi 18:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Feel free, Pasi. I don't mind either way. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 19:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll try to look for sources for the other names, but at least Mr. Lordi's name has been stated in numerous articles in reputable newspapers (Helsingin Sanomat for one) and on many interviews. I would imagine the others have as well. Pasi 17:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

2nd Merge Notice

A request has now also been made to merge the newly-created Devil is a Loser with this article. - Blood red sandman 16:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

3rd Merge Notice

A request has also been made to merge this with Who's Your daddy? (Lordi song). Discuss. - Blood red sandman 14:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Merge notices

Seriously, can we do something about these numerous merge notices on the top of the article? We should either decide to merge (them all) or not merge. It looks silly to have a plethora of merge notices appear there for every single viewer of the page. Pasi 23:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

agreed, it kinda makes the whole article a bit less than official. Herrinz 05:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Someone has taken the tag off Devil is a Loser. - Blood red sandman 06:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge any of them. These singles merit their own articles, because they were hits in a medium/large (pick your choice) sized country. It meets WP:SONGS, therefore.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING^(Я) 20:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I removed the Devil Is a Loser and Blood Red Sandman merge tags. Devil is a Loser tag was removed from the original article, and BRS has been there over a month. I'll remove the last one on 18th unless there's a sudden uprising. Pasi 14:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)