Talk:Megadeth

Archives

May 2005 - May 2006

A request has been made to make this article Today's featured article. Please feel free to leave comments.

Lyrics About Relationships

This quote bothers me: "Mustaine is also known for his original "snarling" vocal style, as well as his recurring lyrical themes, often involving politics, war, addiction, and more recently, personal relationships."

That's completely untrue - perhaps there are more songs about relationships on their more recent albums, but there have been some since KIMB, i.e. Last Rites/Loved to Deth, Tornado of Souls, A Tout Le Monde (relationship with those he loves), Wake Up Dead, In My Darkest Hour, etc.

I will be deleting "and more recently" and if anyone has any objections, we can discuss them here. Dan 05:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

sound clips

perhaps having the sound clips in a more-widespread extention (eg. .wmp, .mp3, etc) would be better, as many people do not know how/do not have the equipment to open .ogg files.

• .ogg is the only format allowed at Wikipedia 208.48.150.6 08:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Band Member Table

A while ago, I added in a table that gave a more visual representation of the members of the band and how long each was in. The new table seems to get rid of that. I modeled the original table around the one used in the Metallica table, and I think this looks better and lets the user visually get the point across. Mobus 19:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

It seems the Metallica table was also changed to the new form, so the example no longer fits my description. Mobus 19:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

"The answer is YES"

This phrase was said by Mustaine in Argentina... the article implies it was said in Puerto Rico, the way I see it... anyone care to rephrase that paragraph? Cheers - ironcito 08:49, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

External Links

I have removed external links to discussion forums as they are a violation of WP:EL. -- MakeChooChooGoNow 18:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Marty Friedman citation

Under the SFSGSW Lineup section it says: "Marty Friedman, who had played in Cacophony with Jason Becker, was initially ruled out by Mustaine for having two-tone hair", and a citation is needed. Well, Dave confirms this in the liner notes to the remaster for Rust In Peace, saying that he hesitated to hire him because of his 2-colored hair on the cover of Dragon's Kiss, the CD that led Dave to discovering him. However, I wouldn't know how to put that in citation form, nor link it to the footnote so... If someone else could do this, that'd be great.

On a personal note, I just want to say that Marty is the best shredder there is (go to hell Yngwie), and everyone needs to hear Dragon's Kiss. Thunder March alone is worth the price.

I just have to agree here, in fact, buy all of Friedmans albums, they all rock Lovefist233 20:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured article?

I think if a few of us get together, we could elevate this page to Featured Article status. It needs a major re-write with a more formal tone, a crapload of references, a bigger & better intro paragraph, and some cleanup, but it is possible. As was done with Dream Theater here, we can combine forces and hammer it out. Iron Maiden, Pink Floyd, Rush and Dream Theater are all good examples of a F.A. band pages, and if we work twords that style and format, we will see 'Deth on the front page one day

After looking at the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Megadeth page, I added quite a few pics. Although discussed above, I believe every lineup(at least) deserves a photo. I'd like to have had more live performance pics, that could maybe replace some of the album covers, as well as a good close up Vic Rattlehead pic, but overall I prefer articels with photos over articles with miles of plain text.

Over the next few weeks I'm gonna work on this one, any all help is appreciated! \m/ Skeletor2112 09:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

All images need sufficient use rationales which show they aren't violating copyright - images aren't even necessary for FA so really I don't see why people are concerned about it. What people should concern themselves with is inline citations, NPOV, removing weasly statements etc. - "What is a featured article?" is a good learning curve.

Also, Dream Theater and Iron Maiden aren't good examples of FAs, as they're both up for FAR and have a lot of problems. Anyone using these as guides on how to write an FA are looking for trouble frankly (I'm trying to help by the way). LuciferMorgan 20:34, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Cool, I haven't used those other articles as a guide so much yet, besides structuring the opening paragraph a little. I've been mainly working on the History section so far - the article is getting a bit long (compared to other music FA articles), but I figure too much is better than not enough, so I am overloading on citations and info (can always be shortened later) without going into band members personal lives too much, unless it affects Megadeth as a band (such as Mustaine's substance abuse).

I'd assume that lineup pics and album covers would qualify for use in the article, tho I am not up on the exact guidelines for picture use. To stay on the safe side I have only been using existing album cover pics, and lineup photos that can fall under the "Promotional" license tag - like ones used on back album covers, ect.

Also, I am wondering what to do with the "Lyical Themes" section. It is way to long, and seems to be mostly made up of song decriptions, with not a lot of info tying it all together. I am thinking about shortening it down to maybe a paragraph or so, using some of the existing lead paragraph, to group together similar songs, ect. Dave's lyrical style is important to mention, IMO - but I don't know how much a "list of song subjects" type section is needed in the article.

I'll be away for a few days, but will pick up with "The Return of Megadeth" and beyond next week. \m/ Skeletor2112 11:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Lyrical themes will have to be cited if that section is kept. Also, right now (as I said on your talk page), the article has weasly statements regarding the reception of albums. LuciferMorgan 17:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Congrats, Megadeth, on having the most badass Featured Article on Wikipedia. Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 20:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

How the hell can this be an FA? It's a typical heavy metal article (i.e. bad) with a load of footnotes at the bottom. One minute you're telling us that Mustaine is putting out one more final Megadeth album due to contractual obligations, the next that the band have announced their next album for release in 2007... The section "Gigantour" is basically a list without bullet points. Basically, it's messy from "Gigantour" on down. Please fix it. --kingboyk 20:43, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The person who got the article to FA left. Someone else will have to clean it. LuciferMorgan 03:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

23 official members?!

Early in the article you can read that: "In their 21 active years, Megadeth have had 23 official members, with Dave Mustaine remaining as the driving force, main songwriter, and sole original member."

At the end of the article there is a list of megadeth members, past and present. Counting those I only get 19 members excluding session muscisians and Mike Albert who is labeled a "fill-in". And even 19 members is being generous because i'm not sure that all names in the list were official members of the band. For example Lor Kain, Matt Kisselstein, etc. Maybe some members aren't listed? Could someone please verify or discredit this figure? BMW Z3 00:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I included session members - as Brian Howe, Vinnie Colaiuta, and Jimmy Sloas all appeared on albums. I am also not too sure about the validity of some of those old members - I have heard of most of the names. Also I dont think Dave Lombardo was ever an official member... so I will change it to 22 for now.

As I go on with the overhaul of this article, I will get as much verifiable stuff as possible regarding early members. Here is a link to a Megadeth family tree, with some of the lesser known names: [1]

These are the members I included in the count:

• Dave Mustaine
• Glen Drover
• Shawn Drover
• James Lomenzo
• James MacDonough
• Jimmy Sloas (studio)
• Vinnie Colaiuta (studio)
• Al Pitrelli
• David Ellefson
• Jimmy DeGrasso
• Nick Menza
• Marty Friedman
• Brian Howe (studio)
• Chuck Behler
• Jeff Young
• Jay Reynolds
• Chris Poland
• Gar Samuelson
• Dijon Carruthers
• Kerry King
• Greg Handevidt
• Lee Rausch

These ones I cant find mention of yet:

• Lor Kain
• Mike Albert (fill-in)
• Matt Kisselstein
• Richard Girod
• Dave Lombardo

I know Dave has mentioned a few of these guys in interviews, I will try to find the references as I redo all the old stuff. \m/ Skeletor2112 06:09, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Recording on a record is the whole idea of being a studio musician. If you don't record on a record, you are not a studio musician. I don't think they should be counted as official members because they were only hired musicians and they have their own term for that.

Also it would be preferable with a different wording such as "at least xx offical members" or "xx offical members at the most" etc. instead of giving an exact figure when it's not certain. BMW Z3 18:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I see your point - I guess studio musicians are not "official members". I put the list at 19 for now - all of whom have credits or Dave has mentioned them as members. Over the next few days I will hunt down references for them. Skeletor2112 11:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Fallen Angels reverts...

I can find no verifiable interview source for any facts regarding "Fallen Angels" - which seems to me would be a seperate band, anyway, and not Megadeth. The quote linked as a citation ([2]) for that info sounds like it was typed wrong, as well:

• "The band that everyone thinks was Fallen Angels, was nothing more than a beginning stage of Megadeth, and a very productive or influential one at that."

Sounds like it should read "...and NOT a very productive or influential one at that." And add to the fact that there is no citation info, such as "taken from Metal Hammer interview 1992" or anything, PLUS that very same timeline says "November, Mustaine and Ellefson form the nucleus of Megadeth" - this is where the band oficially starts, IMO. Robert Cromwell may have influenced Dave, but he recieved no songwriting credit on L.D.T.C. - and the part Dave is talking about is a famous classical passage - Im not up on classical, but its Bach, or Mozart or somthing. I am trying to keep this history strictly "Megadeth" - which, according to the bands official website timeline (in order):

• April, Mustaine forms new band Fallen Angels

• Summer, Dave meets bassist David Ellefson, forms Megadeth with guitarist Greg Handevidt and drummer Dijon Carruthers.

I take the second as the "official" start of the band "Megadeth".

The bottom line is that if we include every single little bit of info there is, the article would be 100 pages long. We could go into detail on Dave in Metallica, feuds, everyone's solo stuff, every single former member's whereabouts, ect ect ect.

Also grammatically, Megadeth is a band, "them", "they", ect - not an "it". You wouldn't say "It went on tour", you'd say "They went on tour".

Skeletor2112 06:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, it seems that part 9 of my history revamp was reverted, so I replaced the info along with the changes above.

Skeletor2112 12:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Subject verb agreement

I know that the British use a plural verb when talking about bands (i.e. Megadeth have released ten albums) and that is ok, (being an American, I don't really agree, since it is an American band, and Wikipedia was made by two Americans...) but in this article, there are a bunch of inconsistencies with the subject verb agreement. At one point a sentence reads, "Megadeth have received..." Then there is "Megadeth has had 18 official members." I really prefer if the singular verb is used since there is only one band, but if there are people who really care, use the plural verb, but please change all of them. If no one cares, then I'll just change all of the verbs to singular. And if you have no idea what I'm talking about then tell me, or I'll just change it anyway. Excellent.Wi-king 03:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree - one or the other. I don't have the slightest idea which is correct or better, but I'm American, so... USA! USA! USA!!!! WOOO HOOO!!!! Skeletor2112 05:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

It should be in the language that fits with the rest of the article. If the rest of the article is written in British then use "have" else use "has". 213.100.48.80 23:56, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm makin the edit, unless anyone wishes otherwiseWi-king 01:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that since the English language was invented by English people that Americans shouldn't comment on their spelling, either way I don't see why we can't have both styles in the article, does it really matter? Lovefist233 20:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Article and FA

In my humble opinion, you should move the song samples to a specific section at the end, and reduce the size of the photographs to about the same size (150-200px) and then space them evenly throughout the article (FA reviewers hate things that look like a magazine). Good luck, and best wishes, for the FA review. --andreasegde 19:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the tips - the pics have been resized, thanks to help from User:M3tal H3ad. Regarding the placement of song samples, I was following the format of other music FA's, such as The KLF, Pink Floyd, and Rush (band), who all use song samples in the articles. I think that as someone is reading, it is helpful to be able to click the song in question, wihtout losing your place by scrolling to the end of the article. We could also add a list of all samples at the end, but it might be redundant... Skeletor2112 06:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

"Removing weasel words" revert

A lot of the edits made left sentences incomplete. Here are a few examples:

• As one of the most commercially successful heavy metal bands of all time, Megadeth has sold more than 20 million albums worldwide, including five consecutive platinum albums, with seven consecutive Grammy nominations for Best Metal Performance.

Was changed to:

• As one of the most commercially successful heavy metal bands of all time, with over 20 million albums sold worldwide, including five consecutive platinum albums, with seven consecutive Grammy nominations for Best Metal Performance.

And:

• Mustaine decided to handle lead vocal duties himself, while also serving as the band's primary lyricist, main songwriter, and rhythm guitarist.

Was changed to:

• Mustaine decided to handle lead vocal duties himself, main songwriter, and rhythm guitarist.

• Even with the resulting poor production, Megadeth's debut Killing Is My Business... And Business Is Good!, released in May 1985, was a well-received effort that blended elements of thrash, speed metal and punk rock.

Was changed to:

• Even resulting with poor production, Megadeth's debut Killing Is My Business... And Business Is Good!, released in May 1985, was a well-received effort that blended elements of thrash, speed metal and punk rock.

• Frustrated by the small independent label's financial insufficiencies, Megadeth signed to major label Capitol Records, who also bought the rights to the new album.

Was changed to:

• Frustrated by small independent label's financial insufficiencies, Megadeth signed to major label Capitol Records, who also bought the rights to album.

• The song remains a fan favorite, and has been performed at nearly every Megadeth show since.

Was changed to:

• The song has performed at nearly every Megadeth show since.

A lot of the edits seemed good, and I will go back and change stuff, but as this article is a featured article candidate, please be careful when changing the prose so drastically. Thanks, Skeletor2112 09:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you mean what you said?

In the "Killing is My Business" section, the second sentence reads:

However, after spending half of that budget on drugs and alcohol, the band was forced to fire their original producer and produce the album themselves.

I assume this means what it says, that the band spent the money on drugs and alcohol, and then fired their producer. If so, rock on, although the exact reason the producer was fired remains unstated. Could they no longer pay his fee?

However, it ocurred to me that the editor might have meant to say that the producer was fired because he spent the band's money. If so, rewording is in order. —Kevin 14:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the first is correct, they had to fire producer Karat Faye because they could no longer pay his salary (I assume the remaining $4,000 was spent on studio time, tape, ect). Skeletor2112 07:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Rock too

They are rock according to iTunes on some of their CDs, we should add this...DrSatan 04:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Please answer this, someone keeps on deleting what I added and won't even discuss it. It's really annoying.DrSatan 05:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

According to iTunes, all of Megadeth, but one song, is rock. That one song is a remix and is called pop. I think that iTunes is just stupid, but it's something to add and keep. I think they're more hard rock anyway, except in some songs...DrSatan 05:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Simple, iTunes is not a valid source. See WP:SOURCE, WP:CITE and WP:V for Wikipedia policies on how to properly reference content. 156.34.142.110 12:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay thanks, that's ALL I wanted to hear. :) DrSatan 02:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Slayer are labeled as pop/rock on some websites, doesn't mean they are. M3tal H3ad 07:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but it's different when it's alarge company that sells music for money...But still, I agree. DrSatan 01:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

itunes isnt very specific about genre anyway, its only got 20 fixed genres in the store and they are all Generalizations of everything in there respective subgenres, so it shouldnt be used as a reference for genre eitherway Balthazarse 21:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I think 'Metal' is the best description of Megadeth's music anyway, as that encompasses all the genres that they fall into while not being too vague Lovefist233 20:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposal Big Four Wikiproject

I have just created the Megadeth Wikiproject. But I think that the scope is too narrow (just Megadeth) and I think that the Metal Genere Wikiproject is too large of a scope to handle everything. I propose that we make a Wikiprject Big Four, or something to that effect to cover the Big Four American Metal bands, Metallica, Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax. I'm eger to hear any opinons.

Just make a Thrash project, imo --DragonDance 19:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Megadeth live

if you have any of the older dates please add them into Megadeth live. --AlexOvShaolin 04:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Killing is My Business Remix/Remaster "vastly improved"

"vastly improved sound quality"? That is utterly subjective! I could argue many reasons why the original is my preferred version, and I heard this "vastly improved" remix/remaster first!Sladek 20:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Are you kidding? The remastered version is completely superior in terms of sound quality... how can you even compare the same CD in versions that are just about 20 years apart? You may prefer the original, as that is what you are used to, but there's no denying the remastered version has better sound quality. Dan 05:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

^That is only your opinion. In the remixed/remastered versions, the dynamics have been squashed, the volume is way too loud and there is tons of clipping. You probably prefer this version due to modern metal albums sharing this horrific mix/master method. Roland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roland19 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the voice of reason, Roland. To the dude above, I am not "used to" the original version. I heard the remaster first. I have since acquired the original and will never listen to the remaster again. So, yes, there is fact denying that the remastered version is better. If you can't understand that, well, I suggest listening to music with a more discerning ear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.244.247 (talk) 18:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Band Members

Kerry King was never an official member, he just covered live dates. He should be removed. Jay316 12:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. Also, when was Mike Portnoy ever involved with Megadeth? As far as I know, he has never filled in on another full-time band since being a part of Dream Theater.

• Mike Portnoy was never a member, but played drums on September 3, 2005. Shawn Drover was handling additional guitar duties that day.

question for experts:)

Megadeth or Megadeath and why ?:) 83.9.230.22 00:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Megadeth, just because. Doppelganger 00:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

A lot of the Megadeth fans I've met seem to have a "holier than thou" attitude towards Slayer fans. Is this because they've sold more albums or have become more popular? I'm about sick of it. Dark Executioner 16:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)Dark Executioner

No actually Megadeth have sold considerably more albums than Slayer but it's only recently Slayer have become more popular. The reason some Megadeth fans (including me) look down upon Slayer is because out of the big four of thrash, they are not very talented in comparison considering bands such as Annihilator, Testament, Exodus and Kreator have been overlooked. One may argue that Slayer is death metal but again there are bands like Cannibal Corpse, Deicide and Death who don't have anywhere near as much recognition as Slayer. Granted Reign In Blood was a pretty good album, but it just doesn't make up for a mediocre catalogue.

To put it short, it's becuase they're overated. ([[User:Giani g|Giani g]] 18:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC))

187- Slayer really displays no talent besides Dave(Lombardo, not Mustaine if you were wondering). On the other hand Megadeth is incredibly talented, and display it.

That may be true but give me Slayer over Metallica any day Lovefist233 21:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Countdown.jpg

Image:Countdown.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation 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.BetacommandBot 21:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Top Forty Hits?

I changed the 18 top forty singles mention in the Legacy section to 18 top forty Mainstream Rock singles. There's a big difference between the Mainstream Rock chart and the Hot 100.Clashwho 23:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Wrong

"Big Four of Thrash" bands, along with Anthrax, Metallica and Slayer. Having been in Metallica, Dave Mustaine is the only man to have been in more than one of these groups. Mustaine was obviously in tallica yes, but Kerry King was also in Megadeth for a short stint. I'm removing it.

My mistakes, sorry :(. I guess it was cuz Mustaine's time in Metallica's beter remembered. Largely because he hit Hetfield (The Elfoid 20:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC))

Fair use rationale for Image:Megadeth-Risk.jpg

Image:Megadeth-Risk.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation 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.BetacommandBot 22:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Megadeth Logo.png

Image:Megadeth Logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation 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.BetacommandBot 22:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Dates

Someone removed the years attached to the eras of the band history, mind if I put em back? (The Elfoid 17:36, 12 August 2007 (UTC))

Duke Nukem: New World Order

the reference to the track that appears on the duke nukem soundtrack, new world order, makes it out to be the same "demo" version that appears on the Youthanasia remastered album. however the version on the soundtrack appears to be a re-recorded and considerably better quality version than the one on the youthanasia remastered album. Balthazarse 01:28, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Lineup pics

Lineups (asterisk indicates a pic)

• 1983
• 1983
• 1983
• 1984-1986 (*)
• 1986
• 1986-1987 (same as 84-86 lineup) (*)
• 1987
• 1987-1989 (*)
• 1989-1998 (*)
• 1998-2000
• 2000-2002 (*)
• 2004
• 2004-2006 (*)
• 2006-present (*)

The 1998-2000 lineup is the only one that contributed to an album (other than 2004's session musicians) that hasn't got an image for it. Could we change that? (The Elfoid 02:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC))

Fair use rationale for Image:Megadeth Logo.png

Image:Megadeth Logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation 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.

BetacommandBot 05:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Spoken article request

I think that this should be made into a spoken article. Who agrees? --DragonDance 19:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm all for this. It may be a tad long, but who cares? PENSIMONSTAR 15:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Citation confusion...

I fail to see why there are "citations needed" for the albums that have not been certified gold, platinum, or multi-platinum. There is no logic in their placement because since the information does not exist to either prove nor disprove these album's sales status... there is no resolution to this problem. For instance Soundscan shows actual sales from major retail chains not including music clubs, but RIAA certification is a result of albums shipped to stores. So an album doesn't have to actually sell 500,000 copies to achieve gold status, nor sell 1,000,000 copies to achieve platinum. Opposite we have the official RIAA website which often doesn't list every album or video that has achieved the required shipment mark (such as Slayer's Live Decade of Aggression, which is not listed on the website yet is a double album of each disc over 40 minutes that has sold very near to 500,000 copies). So I am removing the citations, and can see no reason to see them return. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.124.190 (talk) 09:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Infobox genre lay out

I think it's best to have the genres line break separated because:

• Initial lay out was using line breaks (jan 5, 2006) and their is no objective argument to change it.
• There is no consensus on this formatting topic so we should keep the 'old' format until consensus is reached.
• Other information in the infobox is line break separated
• Practically all metal bands have line break separated genres
• Most infoboxes have line break separated values

If there are convincing arguments to change the initial lay out please discuss it here. Until then, I'll think the original lay out should be preserved. Kameejl ^(Talk) 15:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

WTF

Why do people keep vandalising this page? It seems like it happens a lot. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Because they want to? Whst the fuck do you expect, the vandals to come say why? they dislike megadeth, so they vandalise the page. common fucking sense.