Jump to content

Talk:Dredg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Conscious, Orph and Crickets

[edit]

I vote to merge Conscious (EP), Orph (EP) and Crickets (DVD) to main article on artist. The two are minor demos that seems never actually released anyway. The third is a one-time promotional piece. I also doubt their notability to warrant separate articles. -- Perfecto Canada 16:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The demos were in fact released, but I don't think the writeups on them are large enough to warrant separate pages. Slicing 01:27, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Although the pages themselves are rather small and lacking information, the idea is to add more to them as it becomes available. Some friends of mine from dredg forums and I have been staying in contact with the band to try and fill these gaps. -- Erikpemberton  11:27, 9 November 2005

I fail to verify their release. How about a merge now, then an unmerge when you do? -- Perfecto Canada 21:42, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Conscious (EP) was a demo tape (just like their "industry demos") and was not "released" in any sense. There is a possibility that some copies were sold to fans at some point, but it was never an official release on any label. Orph (EP) was an official release *on some indie label* (i dunno which and am about %70 that it wasn't one run by the band) with artwork and a silver disc. it was a proper release and was for sale to the general public. Crickets (DVD) is very notable due to the nature of it's content and the rarity of the item.--70.229.203.125 00:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned up Unverified Work

[edit]

Erased claims that are unverified since December (4 months is adequate time to revisit the work and fix it, besides, Current Events still has plenty of info without unverified parts.) 208.24.252.14 (talk) 20:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrote article

[edit]

Most of the article has been rewritten over the past few days. I've also archived old discussions from this talk page, to clean up old topics and clutter. I think that the with a few pictures added, the article should be suitable for a B-class rating. --Ars Sycro (talk) 03:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization

[edit]

Due to a recent dispute over capitalization, I asked for editor mediation. As the response was that there is no specific guideline in a case such as this, I hope that other editors will give their input and we can all come to a consensus. There's also the option of a WP:3 or of an official mediation, but I doubt that's necessary. So...give your input. PEiP (talk) 20:30, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This response is wrong. There are several guidelines and policies regarding capitalisation of band names:
  • WP:NC states "In band names and titles of songs or albums, the standard rule in the English language is to capitalize words that are the first or the last word".
  • MOS:TM also applies with regards to band names, as can be seen from the use of Kiss (band) as an example. MOS:TM states to "choose the style that most closely resembles standard English, regardless of the preference of the trademark owner".
  • Furthermore MOS:TM states, "Trademarks rendered without any capitals are always capitalized".
  • WP:MUSTARD also states that "Standard English text formatting and capitalization rules apply to the names of bands and individual artists"

Plenty of other articles are capitalised, where the band renders the name lowercase, for example Blink-182. This is about correct English grammar, not maintaining the incorrect stylistic preferences of some band. Nouse4aname (talk) 08:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of "Commonly typeset as: dredg" in the first paragraph or Info Box is a suitable remedy, moreso for bands that have a broader deviation from standard English. This isn't enough to render the title un-searchable, so, meh. 209.180.155.14 (talk) 05:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genres

[edit]

Under genres there are several styles listed, but most are broad categories that have been chosen in favor of more specific/accurate genre choices available. For instance, instead of "progressive rock" I think "progressive metal" would be much more accurate. Their earlier work in particular sounds a lot more like a progressive version of System of a Down than it does old Genesis or even newer King Crimson. Also, "alternative rock" and "art rock" are broad categories that you could maybe fit Dredg into on some sort of technicality, but this band is not what one usually thinks of when they think of alternative or art rock. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julrey (talk • contribs) 18:21, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Dredg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:30, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dredg. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 01:08, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

[edit]

This article is continually updated by a mobile user from the same IP address. Can we get this page protected?

Edit: Page protection has been requested for this article. Plantduets (talk) 19:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dredg&oldid=1201652974"