Talk:Faktion

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

Articles for Deletion debate

This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Doc^g 21:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism is Unnecessary!

I see a number of edits in the edit history of this article that show that this article has had vandalism cleaned up on numerous occasions, including the vandalism I just cleaned up today.

If you love Faktion and think they're an awesome band, that's great. If you think they're a terrible band, that's fine too. We all have our opinions of who we like and don't like, what music we love and what we can't stand.

Coming to vandalize a band's Wikipedia entry, however, is not appropriate. You may not like the band, but Wikipedia isn't here to promote them nor are they here to run them into the ground. Wikipedia is here to educate people with a neutral point of view (NPOV). Folks can browse and look up a wide variety of subjects, whether they're working on a doctoral thesis, research paper or they just want to know how old the lead singer is. Whatever the case may be, people should be able to look up the information they seek without having to wade through pointless vandalism just because you think that a particular artist isn't any good.

We're all welcome to our opinions, but one of Wikipedia's biggest strengths is that it presents information from a neutral point of view. Vandalism completely erodes the value of Wikipedia and also wastes administrators' and other users' time for having to go clean up after those who leave piggy messes. We could much better spend our time constructively contributing to the community.

Regards, Matt Msawyer91 22:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed AMG External Link

I removed the All Music Guide link from the page because it contains false information about the band. The page says that Biggs joined the band when it should be Gibbs, and it also lists Biggs as another member of the band, which is untrue.

Tunelabmusicdotcom 01:33, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add B-Side EP?

I think the B-Side EP should get more "coverage" on this page, since it's only mentioned in one sentence... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.227.155.134 (talk) 01:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emo?

What complete and utter moron labeled them as emo? Here's a tip: A band who releases a few slow, sappy songs isn't automatically emo. By that logic, Metallica, GNR, STP, Pantera, and a whole slew of other blatantly non-emo bands are emo.

64.183.194.82 (talk) 19:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Faktion. 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) 21:11, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]