Talk:Versailles (band)

Naming

Sorry I don't really know how to use this properly but I think the name of the page should be changed back to Versailles and have Also Known As: Versailles -Philharmonic Quintet- they are still known as Versailles all around the world EXCEPT USA were this name comes into play and also they are fighting a court case so they don't need it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aruzo (talk • contribs) 13:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Aruzo! I think this new subtitle is universal, not just for America, considering it is printed on their recent release. The name should also hold, because the subtitle is intended to reach the English-speaking world (Americas and Europe), thus the English Wikipedia should reflect this. Lastly, the page is already under an inconveniently expanded title, and rather than the full suffix of (Japanese band), another form of the band name is preferred. IF you'd going to make the page name long, keep it relevant, I suppose? --Jacob ^Talk 13:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with Aruzo I'm afraid. I don't agree with the fact that this title is 'universal' for many reasons, mainly on a cultural level. Versailles is primarily, a Japanese band rooted in the cultural context of its Japanese members and Visual Kei. Versailles was obviously an original name which came up after meticulous scrutiny, considering the rest of the band was 'hand-picked'. Similarly, the band was created in light of it being "the absolute youshikibi, sound and extremes of aestheticism”. Thus, its original name is a reflection of what its creators wanted it to be.

Versailles -Philharmonic Quintet- 'does' apply to the USA only. It's been made clear on several occasions by the band and Versailles' manager, that this is only to be reflected here. This name was only created in lieu of a potential lawsuit and naming conflict. It was not changed therefore because Versailles wanted it. I believe it was a mere tactical manoeuvre so that they could tour and sell their material overseas. Evidence for this is that, still to today their name has not been changed in any other country. This obviously reflects their want to retain their original name, and that their naming incident and its repercussions were contrivances.

I think it's important to remember that this band is Japanese, and the Visual Kei scene is open to large audiences worldwide. Just because there was a naming dispute in the United States, does not mean it should be changed on a universal, english speaking website. America is not the only place that speaks English. Versailles originated in Japan and today is predominantly focused in that country. I personally feel it's wrong to entitle a whole band by its concoction of a name. It was not chosen because it was wanted, instead it was because of a naming conflict in America. The band still remains as Versailles in Japan under Sherow Artist Society (Kamijo's own label). It still remains as Versailles in Europe under the CLJ label. When it is going to be signed under Warner Japan BMG, the band will still be called Versailles.

I do agree however that the title of the article is unncessarily long. But Versailles_-Philharmonic_Quintet- is long in itself, as its uncommon subtitle might be difficult to spell to some. I feel that 'Japanese_Band' is perfectly fine, as it is relevant to what it actually is. It perfectly shows its' disambiguation from other 'Versailles' articles anyway. Sorry for the long comment, but I personally feel that Aruzo is right. User: vincentcook

I agree with vincentcook. I think it should just be Versailles too as that was their original name. I agree with vincentcook that it was their original name that they chose out of their own free will. Philharmonic Quintet merely came about because of a lawsuit. I think tons of tons feel the same, and it a sense its upsetting to fans. It should just be 'Versailles' and also known as 'Philharmonic Quintet" LuGiADude (talk) 20:03, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I think at the end of the day this is a Japanese band, and its name in Japan is 'Versailles' with no additions. Likewise, this is the same name the band uses worldwide except for just one country - which I'm afraid the world does not revolve around.

I don't suppose a move without an established consensus was your best judgement, LuGiADude, especially with conversation hardly being dead. If you would take notice to the way the band advertises themselves, the new subtitle was adopted to avoid lawsuit in the foreign market, however, the subtitle is now part of the bands public profile. Flyers distributed in Japan include the "Philharmonic Quintet" suffix universally, as well as it underscoring their name on nearly every instance of their visible logo on their official website. At first it was inherently murky how wide usage of this name would spread, but with the name change now firmly cemented in the band's history, the subtitle sees constant and consistent use in every market, and thus, the name would be the preferred page title here, particularly to avoid appending any parenthetical notes within the title itself (something used only to denote that the two subjects are exclusively known by the same name). --Jacob ^Talk 05:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I believe it would be best to include some examples here, right? We have their most recent appearance in Shoxx, and then a cover and full spread in Cure. Lastly, and I suppose this really should seal the issue, the recent single Prince & Princess (a release for the Japanese market) --Jacob ^Talk 05:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Some points: 1) This is the English Wikipedia, not the American Wikipedia. In England they're just known as "Versailles". 2) If another country was to rename My Chemical Romance to "My Chemical Romance -The Rejects-" due to copyright problems, and they released a few over here as -The Rejects- would you change the article? No. 3) Majority have said in this discussion that it should be just Versailles. 3 versus 1, if another joins it'll be either 3 vs 2 or 4 vs 1... it doesn't matter. Fact is, Majority ATM say Versailles. 4) Putting a subtitle in the main title is stupid. LuGiADude (talk) 15:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough that on album covers and in magazaines, the subtitle is included. We are not disputing that. The bands registered name as far as I can tell is 'Versailles' everywhere in the world apart from one country. Another clear example where its context can be applied here is the Wiki article on 'Aerith Gainsborough', a character from FF7. Arguably one of the most popular games to have come out in the last 15 years. FF7 is a japanese game, and originally came out in that country. In just Japan alone, she is called 'Aerith'. Everywhere else in the world, and practically the majority of gamers in the world call her 'Aeris' as this is how it was translated. So even in this case, the majority rules that she is called 'Aeris' and practically the world knows her as this. Yet still, after extensive debate and discussion the article remains as 'Aerith' also known as 'Aeris'. The game came from Japan, and thus the article was named after the original name. Thus I feel that the situation should be extenuated here to cover Versailles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincentcook (talk • contribs) 15:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

This.LuGiADude (talk) 16:29, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Pictures

I can't tell if this little comment I have goes here or not. Well, more like contribution. I have photos of the band's album "NOBLE" and a picture to be used on the front page, displaying the band. It would be extremely appreciated if someone can help me in my ordeal. Thanks! —Comment added by Ff7fan4evr (talk • contribs) 04:40, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Seeing as the band is active and performing live shows, it is possible to obtain a free-use image, so fair-use images (such as these promotional pictures) are generally to be avoided. --Jacob ^Talk 04:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

So, considering the situation, are album covers allowed to be posted without any conflicts and such? (I'm new to this whole Talk page thing, so excuse my informal-ness.) --Ff7fan4evr 04:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Genre

Right now Versailles genres are listed as: Symphonic metal, Power metal and Neo-Classical metal.

I have no problem with these genres for Versailles. However, I would love to hear everyone elses' opinions. Referancing genres isn't always the solution. As in, I mean that for the quality of the article, it would be best to get everyones' opinions on this first. Kuro Banpaia (talk) 03:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

How is referencing genre "[not] always the solution?" I think that it is an integral part to credibility, that anything that could be outside the realm of objectivity has a firm and credible source. There is nothing on Wikipedia that is (in theory) "better-off" without a source, with the exception of the subject's name itself. Citations are the single most important measure of credibility Wikipedia has to offer. --Jacob ^Talk 03:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't mean for it to sound that way. What I mean is, the current solution for the genre is to talk about it. To see if it's necessary to find a source for a genre that others might be objected to. I'm not saying it shouldn't be sourced. I'm saying that It should also be talked about, to further the quality of the article; to see what others have to say about it. Kuro Banpaia (talk) 05:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think the current three genres are a good focus, so I'd say those are fine and ready to be sourced. If you find a trend in major sources using an alternative term, include that as well, and if you cannot find any sources for another term, leave it up with a {{fact}} template. I'm not sure what is left to be unclear in this situation? --Jacob ^Talk 06:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)