Talk:Heaven & Hell (band)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Heaven and Hell studio album

In the booklet for Black Sabbath: The Dio Years, it said something about the possibility of a new studio album, since the 3 new tracks came so "smoothly." Is there any official word about that yet? URFG 21:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)URFG

Bill Ward as a former member

Bill Ward had become dissociated from the project before it was officially announced. Is it really fair to say he is a "former member"?

That's a very valid observation. He can't be a former member of something that hadn't even started when he made his decision to sit it out. His name should be turfed. 156.34.211.206 12:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

• Where it is true he wasn't part of the band during their performances, he was still a member of the band itself, and should be noted as a former member of the band - Alterego269

His participation was only a false press rumour. He never was, nor did he ever have intention to take part in the project. 142.167.90.10 10:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

I screwed up the infobox;and it has no colours. Could someone fix it? The Wiki Priest 23:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikify

I don't know how to put a wikify tag on an article, but I think it's needed here.

It's also very, very long for an article that is really just a reformed Black Sabbath and has only recorded three songs. I'm going to shorten it; as most of the info seems to be lifted from websites and articles, perhaps links to them would be better than the huge slabs here at the moment. BrianFG 13:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Track List for Tour?

I was at the first Heaven and Hell show (Vancouver, BC - March 11, 2007). Would information from that show be useful, or just clutter? --Llewdor 22:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Without a reference it would just be original research. Adding setlists from 1 show would just open up a can of worms and setlists from every show would start popping up. And that wouldn't be very encyclopedic. And with that out of the way...was it a good show?(guessing the answer is a resounding YES) 156.34.223.68 22:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I thought as much, but it didn't hurt to check. Since the set was entirely songs from the Dio era, the show was somewhat unique in Sabbath history. And yes, the show was excellent. Ronnie's voice is still very good (and I don't just mean good for a man who turns 65 in July - he's objectively good). And there was a wonderfully anachronistic drum solo. Plus, the opening acts were brilliant. Megadeth had a great set - with encore - and even Down, who I don't even like, put on a great performance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Llewdor (talk • contribs) 00:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

http://www.iommi.com/iommi_frames.htm

Check it out - the set list has been confirmed anyway. Someone stick it in. (The Elfoid 09:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC))

It's still unencyclopedic. Content better suited for a teen fanpage. Without looking too stupid a setlist link could be added to the External links section. An Iommi.com link doen't break WP:EL. 156.34.223.68 11:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Was a spur of the moment response to 'original research'. I agree thinking about it, that it's not encyclopaedic (The Elfoid 15:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC))

RE: Joe Seigler

Joe Seigler is a fan of Black Sabbath and runs a fan site dedicated to Black Sabbath. He also has a volunteer relationship setting up websites for two members of Black Sabbath but is in no way employed by anyone who has anything to do with Black Sabbath despite his constant claim to the contrary. It is contrary to the goals of Wikipedia to aid him by blocking other users who point this fact out.

In fact, he made a point of posting on his website that he's only a fan and is in no way employed by Sabbath.

= But he runs official websites for band members. He's not employed by the band but as an individual employee for separate members. (The Elfoid 20:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC))

Again, he is not employed by anyone having anything to do with Black Sabbath inc. He volunteers his time and energy to create and maintain two websites of Black Sabbath members solo work but that does not make him an employee nor does it make him the official webmaster of the official Black Sabbath website as he claims. No small feat. He does a great job at collecting other peoples work into a compolation fan site but he has no credentials beyond his fandom. He is not a journalist, not a musician, not even a college graduate with any specialized experience other than a CD collection and a computer. I don't see why this is a big issue. He is NOT the official webmaster for Black Sabbath. If I creat a website in tribute to a band it doesn't make me the official webmaster for the band, it doesn't make me an employee, it doesn't even get me a free CD. It just means that one of my hobbies is making fan sites for bands that I like. For others to work with this guy in blocking people who try to put what he does in its true light is just wrong.

Old Photos

We need a picture of the 1980 recording lineup with Bill Ward and 1992's reunion. Ideally the 1980-1981 lineup too.

The band existed in 2006-2007. Old photos not required as they would be for Blsck Sabbath and not H&H. 156.34.209.136 10:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Article requires cleanup

This article is not written in an encyclopedic style and also includes a ton of superfluous junk that's already in more appropriate artticles. The entire "Pre Heaven and Hell" section is simply regurgitating content already in the Black Sabbath and Dio articles and is not required here at all. The lead-in is extremely poor and reads like it was written for a schoolboy book report. The remaining sections about the actual band are, like the lead-in, very poorly written and require cleanup. I will request repair assistance from a couple of admins who are familiar with the topic. 156.34.209.136 10:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I have attempted an overhaul without changing any content. Basically correcting grammar and aiming towards greater clarity in what is already presented. I agree that the article contains entirely too much background for one which is about a brief reunion tour/collaboration. So I may be wasting a lot of time in cleaning up what will be subsequently deleted anyway. Most of the info presented here would be better suited to the Black Sabbath article and the headings are atrocious (even with my minor edits). That being said, I just got floor seats to the H&H Sunrise, FL show and I'm stoked. BrianO 16:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

It seems that The Elfoid is currently modifying as well. While many of his modifications have clarified what I wrote, some of them are opinions and thus not encyclopedic in nature. Again I want to stress that many of his mods are definite improvements, but his addition to the Breakup section "Exact details of the events that led to the breakup are debateable at best, and with the band's recindled friendship bringing up the past is unlikely to happen soon." is not one of them. The spelling errors notwithstanding, "Exact details are debatable" is always implied in any description of a band's break up. I only listed the few verifiable "symptoms" of the band's decline as an example of the going's on. BrianO 17:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

It all falls under the "poorly written junior high book report" look. I vote to lose the entire 'past history' section. The article just needs links to Black Sabbath and Dio in a 'see also' section. The "Summary of main collaborations by Heaven and Hell members" is pretty stupid too. Again... all information better left to other articles where it's more appropriate. H&H doesn't have a discography either... other than the new tracks on the poorly compiled 'Dio Years' disc. This article was almost an AfD right from its origin. It was determined at that time that if the article simply regurgitated content from the Sabbath and Dio articles then it was a pointless article and would go up for a second AfD. The way it's leaning right now I am abput to say go for the second AfD. I have asked for admin assistance, simply to have another set of eyes look at it to see if it warrants another vote. 156.34.142.110 17:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I've been dressing up a pig. This should be a one pager discussing only the reunion with appropriate links to "the rest of the story". I'd be willing to slash and burn but I am not overly familiar with the etiquette required to do so. Is there a way to have a draft copy without losing the information contained in the original? If so it could be as simple as comparing the two and choosing one by consensus. BrianO 18:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Nothing is ever truly lost on Wikipedia since one can always rv back to a previous version if they want to be a dink about it and start an edit war. For this type of mass-crap-crop there are 2 guidelines... Be bold! and concensus. You and I have created a concensus that this article is 80% junk. You can either assume good faith that most other editors would tend to agree... if they are truly here to try and create a quality encyclopedia. 156.34.215.210 20:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Made a major edit, and I will attempt to verify facts and cite statement sources in the coming days. BrianO 01:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

It is a vast improvement over the "superfluity explosion" that it was before... Someone give that man a barnstar! 156.34.215.210 02:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I think my work is done here. I've stripped the article of it's lengthy background (which was already covered in the appropriate articles), checked facts/statements and added References/Footnotes). While I truly appreciate the work and passion that went into the original, I do feel I edited in good faith. Humbly..... BrianO 17:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I will attempt to "organize into coherent sections" as requested by the re accessor. BrianO 01:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Sections organized somewhat coherently, I think. BrianO 21:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested reassessment

I'm leaving this as start class for now. This article's prose (i.e. what is currently the lead section) should be organised into coherent sections, and perhaps a bit longer, for it to reach B class. I suggest following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines#Page layout, which can be particularly helpful for organising articles. - Zeibura ^(Talk) 01:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

About all the work I did that people complained about

I agree in some cases it was a bit epic (the tables on tours/discographies etc) and in retrospect un-necessary. But the detailed explanation of the band members' history was useful. Again, perhaps excessive (I have a tendancy to write in excess - I'm a fan of details and accept often overdo it), but something should be included. The fact information is already on Wikipedia is irelevant in this case I think. I don't think people should have to read the entire Dio, Black Sabbath and Heaven and Hell article to understand Heaven and Hell. Even an article half the length of what I put could be damn useful. And no, this isn't a personal "you stole my work" thing. I just liked what was there before.

I'm not here to cause an argument, made my views known. If anyone thinks even a limited level of expansion could be made I'll take part, if not I'm done with this page. There's plenty of parts of Wikipedia to edit other than this. (The Elfoid 14:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC))

Cross-article data overload is frowned upon on Wikipedia. Better explained by guidelines like WP:BETTER/WP:TOPIC. There isn't any need for detail when a wiki-link to the already existing/more detailed article can be used... even if it's a related topic(like associated acts in music). If the reader wants to read about those related topics.... then they are free to do so by clicking on the appropriate links provided. Wikipedia is already overflowing with cruft, fluff and superfluity. This article was almost AfD'd. It was coming close to being AfD nominated again. It's now crisp, clean and precise(with room for minor tweaking). The noble work now is to try and keep it that way. 156.34.142.110 14:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Elfoid, as a fan, I too "liked what was there before". However, as a Wikipedian, I realized that there was too much redundancy. I will be trying to add "categories" in the coming days and perhaps you will be inclined to add a few (brief ;-) bits of info to those. BrianO 18:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't confuse my behaviour with fanboyism. I am just a completest. (The Elfoid 18:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC))

Duly noted. I'm BrianO by the way FlthyGunslinger 19:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Assessment

The sections are extremely small - one is two sentences, one is only one sentence. That's over-sectioning (yes, I made up a word), and doesn't reflect the actual amount of information in the article. I wouldn't say that's "a majority of the material needed for a completed article". Still a start-class. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The article suffers from much fan made POV bullshit in my opinion also - the "drummer" issue etc. being a case in point. LuciferMorgan 13:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

This article was pared down from a heavy retrospective on Black Sabbath. I believe the "drummer" issue is relevant. Without at least a bit of history, the article would be a perpetual stub. I, for one, do not appreciate your condescending tone, Lucifer. BrianO 17:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The name "Heaven and Hell"

This is at the level of original research, so it would need to be followed up before anything could be said in the article. However, I can report that on the current Australian leg of the tour no real suggestion is being made in the billing, marketing, or performances that this is a band called "Heaven and Hell" (as opposed to that being the name of the tour). It's all about this being a reunion of the Dio-era version of Black Sabbath. I suspect that the emphasis changed somewhere along the line during the tour. Metamagician3000 03:30, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, I should quickly add that my actual ticket does say "Heaven & Hell", with no mention of Black Sabbath. Metamagician3000 09:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

In the UK it's just billed as Heaven and Hell with Lamb of God. I had someone ask me if it's a tour headlined by Lamb of God or if Heaven and Hell is an actual band. (The Elfoid 23:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC))

Vinny vs. Bill

It is also a TRUE reunion line-up, because this line-up already reunited once before for Dehumanizer. That fact is missing from the page, as far as I can tell.Vegetaman 20:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, to be a true reunion it'd have to include Geoff Nicholls. Anyway, Wikipedia isn't a discussion board - stick to the article please. LuciferMorgan (talk) 08:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

"Heaven and Hell" or "Heaven & Hell"?

The official website and tour poster call it "Heaven and Hell", though the CD cover and DVD cover refer to it as "Heaven & Hell". Given this inconsistency, why does this article use "and" over "&"? Una Laguna^Talk 16:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The album/song the band is named after is strictly "Heaven and Hell". But, I agree, a lot of the official stuff lack consistency. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 16:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1