Talk:Slayer/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about Slayer. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Jeff Hanneman's status in the band

So far as the members section goes, how does Jeff Hanneman's medical hiatus equate to his leaving the band? Several interviews and things I have seen in the past infer that the other guys in Slayer are waiting for him to recover before recording the next album, and there's not really a reason for them to do that if he left/is no longer part of the band.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 21:24, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

According to the most recent sources, Slayer is pushing forward with the new album and EP without Hanneman. Since the spider bite, he's only performed live once (that I can see) and apparently he joined the band for the recent writing sessions, but backed out due to his condition. He's not out of the band per se, but he's certainly not a currently active member. The sources I can think of that said Slayer would wait for Hanneman's condition to improve are close to a year old now. I don't think that's the case anymore. From the band's public statement two days ago: "We also wanted you to know that we've been doing some writing and recording for the next Slayer album - we've tracked a few songs, and will finish the album when we're off the road later this year. Gary will join us on tour in Europe and the UK in May and June, and then we'll all see you on this Summer's Mayhem Festival." Fezmar9 (talk) 22:39, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Those are some pretty heavy assumptions you're making, particularly since Jeff is still listed as an active member on their official site: http://www.slayer.net/us/theband. Can you find any references to back up your point? Please remember that Wikipedia:REF trumps all else, particularly unpublished assumptions on the part of fans. Until the band makes an official announcement that Jeff is no longer in the band this article needs to reflect the plain, referencable facts. --Williamsburgland (talk) 20:06, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Would it maybe be better to place Hanneman under an ";Inactive members" (or whatever) heading? While I still don't agree with Fezmar evaluating Hanneman as a former member, he certainly has a point that Hanneman is not really a very active participant at this point due to the ongoing recovery process.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 23:19, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

EDIT - Oh, and for the bar chart thing, how bout adding a new color for touring guitarist, since Gary Holt has been working with them for a while now--L1A1 FAL (talk) 23:21, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

The point would be when Slayer makes an official announcement to that effect... for all where know Hanneman is contributing to the writing process in some way. A secondary source would be if the band releases an album/EP and Hanneman is not credited. Otherwise we're making assumptions and adding OR to wikipedia. Also, the charts generally only cover actual, and not touring members of a band. --Williamsburgland (talk) 01:51, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Williamsburgland, the ref you provided seems as if it was written shortly around the time World Painted Blood was released in 2009 and clearly doesn't reflect recent events. The ref I provided is from three days ago. I don't know how you see me as making any "unpublished assumptions on the part of fans", all of my claims are coming directly from the citation I have provided. Fezmar9 (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you're attaching a connotation to the phrase "former member" that suggests that Hanneman has either been kicked out or is completely done with the band and won't be returning. That's neither what I'm suggesting nor the source from a few days ago is suggesting. I'm saying he's not currently active, he doesn't plan on being active in the near future, thus he was once active with the band in the past—or he was a formerly active member. If someone who is not touring with Slayer, isn't writing music with Slayer, and is sitting on a couch while Slayer tours and records is considered a current member of Slayer, the I suppose I'm a current member of Slayer too. Fezmar9 (talk) 21:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

To be clear, the release doesn't say he isn't writing with Slayer, it says he isn't touring with Slayer. It also doesn't say anything even remotely to the effect that Hanneman is no longer in Slayer. Saying so here would be pure speculation on our part. Certainly, you can say in the body of the article that he has not toured with the band in the past year, and that the band has released a statement saying they don't know when he'll be back, but you can't make the assumption that he's no longer a member of the band, active or not because there isn't anything saying that... as I said, the release doesn't even explicitly state that he isn't writing - he doesn't need to be able to play to write, so for all we know he is taking an active role writing new material. Finally, with respect to the website, the age of the material doesn't really matter the same way Tool's band members being listed on their website isn't impacted by the fact that their last album came out 6 years ago. My position is that without an official release from the band stating that Hanneman is no longer in the band, or that someone else has actually taken his place in the band, or if they release a recording without Hanneman credited. I understand your position, and frankly I agree. Something similar happened with Fear Factory recently - it was fairly clear that their latest drummer was no longer in the band, and even announced that he would not be joining them on their upcoming tour, but he could not be removed from the members list until there was official word from the band that he was no longer a member and that he had no recorded or been credited on their last album. --Williamsburgland (talk) 22:42, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

According to recent articles from Rolling Stone and 107.7 The Bone via Blabbermouth, Hannenman is not an active member of Slayer. In the 18 months since his incident, he played two songs in an encore performance and rehearsed for one show in November 2011 but never ended up performing. Hanneman also hasn't written or recorded any material for the upcoming album. It's unknown if and when he might return. Fezmar9 (talk) 07:49, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure where the divide here is, but nowhere in that article does it say "Jeff is no longer a member of Slayer". It doesn't even say he might not be a member of Slayer. I'm not saying it isn't a possibility that he might have to formally step down at some point in the future, or that he may not be credited on the upcoming EP or album, but per WP:Crystal ball, we're not here to make assumptions for the band or jump to conclusions based on coverage of the situation. If something official comes from the band go for it; otherwise it doesn't belong here. --Williamsburgland (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm in no way suggesting that Hanneman is no longer a member of Slayer—the term "no longer" has a connotation of permanence as in the sentence "I am no longer a high school student". I'm not saying he was kicked out, I'm not saying he quit, I'm not saying he's gone for good. I would much rather use the word absent or inactive, or actually I really liked Rolling Stone's word: sidelined (to cause (a player) to be unable to play on a team or in a game). The band members section of this article has two false, time-related claims: Hanneman is currently a band member and he has been consecutively an active member from 1981 until the present. The entity known as Slayer is currently and presently writing new material, recording and touring. Hanneman is not doing any of these activities, thus he is not currently or presently acting as a member of Slayer. His condition physically prohibits any of these activities. The sources I have provided clearly and explicitly explain that Hanneman is absent from the band—he has been for some time and there is no estimated time for him to return. Just because the sources don't phrase it as "Jeff is no longer a member of Slayer" doesn't mean what I'm saying is inaccurate or original research. In fact, when it comes to medical conditions or death you'd likely never find a source explicitly stating someone is no longer a member. For example, I highly doubt you'll ever find a source that says Chi Cheng is no longer a member of Deftones. But he has been in a coma for four years now and hasn't contributed anything to the band since. Or you probably won't find a source that explicitly states Adam Yauch will no longer be a member of Beastie Boys since his death. Should Wikipedia still state that Cheng and Yauch are still active members of their respective bands simply because there are no sources that explicitly state "X is no longer a member of Y"? If it's obvious to you that these other cases are completely absurd, you should also realize that Hanneman's case is the exact same. Fezmar9 (talk) 17:09, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I think the Adam Yauch argument is quite a bit ridiculous. It's perfectly reasonable to come to the conclusion that upon a person's death they are no longer involved in the activities they were when they were alive. When Steve Jobs died, it didn't take a formal message from Apple saying that he had stepped down from the board upon his death to list his history at the company as ending at the time of his death, nor did his wife have to posthumously divorce him if she wished to get remarried. Less ridiculous is the Chi argument, though it's quite unique, and a reasonable person would certainly see the difference between someone with a debilitating arm injury and a person who has been in a semi-comatose state over the past 4 years due to brain trauma - the major factor being that Hanneman can certainly participate in the writing process. He is in a cogent state where he can generate material and feedback. While I understand that the Rolling Stone piece seems to insinuate that he is not taking part, it's up to the band whether they want to credit him or not. This leads me to my final point - Deftones meets a very reasonable set of criteria - they recorded a record on which Chi is not credited, and another person is credited in his place. In that case it's perfectly reasonable to assume he is no longer in the band. --Williamsburgland (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

The Rolling Stone article doesn't "insinuate" Hanneman isn't taking part, it straight up says so: "So far, the band has been working without guitarist Jeff Hanneman," "Hanneman wasn't at the recent recording sessions," "It's still unknown if Hanneman will be able to return in time to perform solos on the new Slayer album," King: "We're planning for him to come back and the door is open." In the Blabbermouth article, King also said "This [new album has] been all me so far. He's welcome to contribute. It's just a matter of him [putting] something [together] and getting it to us." You say I should find an official statement from the band, and I've found two different interviews from Kerry King that both confirm Hanneman isn't an active member. Now please tell me where my original research is. Fezmar9 (talk) 18:19, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Both pieces also say that King historically performs almost all the strings on recordings, and RS explicitly says it's up in the air as to whether Hanneman comes back to record solos as he generally does. This is getting a bit silly - if you want to put a note next to Hanneman's name that says mostly inactive since whenever, fine, please go ahead. I'd also suggest editing the article itself to explain the absence, since the purpose of WP is to report known facts and allow readers to come to their own conclusions. Beyond that, listing his as a former member or even an inactive member is going too far. Until the EP is released (or, again, a formal statement) anything beyond that is indeed OR in my view.--Williamsburgland (talk) 19:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I'd be willing to settle for a footnote. Just as long as this article doesn't make it appear as if Hanneman is actively participating in all things Slayer right now then I'll be satisfied. Fezmar9 (talk) 18:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I think the way it's written in Chi Cheng's article right now is fine, and in this case we'll know more by the end of the year. That said, if you want to do a footnote I think that's a good compromise if I understand the concept correctly. --Williamsburgland (talk) 19:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I have just added a footnote to the band members section about what has been discussed here. Tell me what you think. Also, if you're referring to Deftones#Band members, you should know that within minutes of me using that as an example, an editor who I have engaged in a discussion with about the use of time-sensitive words like "current" in band members section, removed the section headers. This is what it looked like earlier today. Fezmar9 (talk) 19:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

That works well I think - hopefully we will get some clarity on Jeff's future with the band this year. Re: Cheng; that's actually how I remember it. In his unique case, I think either way is fine. He's mostly comatose and unable to carry out simply, every day functions, so it's reasonable to assume he's not active. In addition to that, I believe the band did make some statement before moving forward in regards to his status in the band, I just don't have time to dig through Blabbermouth right now. --Williamsburgland (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

If you have open dialog RE: Deftones and you want a third opinion let me know. My feeling would be to leave it your way in the band members section for the above reasons, but to leave him in the infobox as a current member. I didn't see a discussion on the talk page.--Williamsburgland (talk) 20:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Little mistake in the introduction part

I've noticed one sentence that says that Slayer was the only member of „The Big Four“ not to have platinum certificated album until 2010 Big Four live album from Sofia. If you look at Anthrax discography, you'll see that they don't have platinum album neither.--89.205.37.166 (talk) 15:05, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

STOP TAKING AWAY THE SPEED METAL TAG

Slayer were originally a SPEED METAL band, you idiots! It's so funny all the other "Big Four" are classified as thrash/speed metal yet Slayer is not! Are the moderators of Wikipedia retarded?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0s5C0hwnKvI — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.228.99.106 (talk) 13:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes 72.224.201.135 (talk) 01:01, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm gonna go edit this page and return speed metal to the infobox along with a citation to allmusic. 99.108.198.222 (talk) 18:21, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Dave Lombardo should not be considered a "former member"

I keep having to move him back into the "current members" sections because some users seem to think that just because he is missing out on a tour, he is out of the band for good. Yes, there have been tensions in the band over this pay dispute, but Dave's announcement never said he was leaving Slayer or was fired, just that he was being replaced for a tour. He also stated that he remains hopeful that they can resolve their differences. He wouldn't leave if he was hopeful, and I doubt he'd be so hopeful if they fired him completely either.

I have added notes to ask editors not to move him into former members until there's an announcement to say he has been fired, which should hopefully prevent it from happening as much. Chances are this announcement will never come if tensions are cooled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrIpodz (talk • contribs) 19:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with this 666%. As of now, none of the recent announcements can be reasonably interpreted as anything more than a bump in the road. If it becomes something more, we'll know. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Slayer just now announced on Facebook that Paul Bostaph is back in full time. Link: https://www.facebook.com/slayer/posts/10151670438275390 162.40.206.141 (talk) 22:31, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Propose removal of "Fans" section

I propose removing the "Fans" section of the article as it is A) unsourced; B) trivial; and C) opinion ("Slayer fans are known^{[by whom?]} as the most rabid and devoted^[opinion] in all of metal."). This in no way helps contribute to the informative nature of the article.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 01:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm just going to remove it. It is fancruft that is in no way Featured Article-level content.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

The parts of the article that discuss the band's writing process should be altered somehow following Hanneman's death

Obviously, statements such as "King and Hanneman create and arrange the music..." are outdated now as Hanneman is no longer alive to create or arrange music. However, the problem I find with trying to edit these parts is that I feel like it's giving the impression that Slayer have disbanded, and obviously we don't know what they're going to do about their future without Jeff yet, so I don't want that. Also, even if they do carry on we don't know whether their writing process will be exactly the same minus Hanneman so I'm unsure about just "King creates and arranges the music..." Any suggestions on how it could be altered? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrIpodz (talk • contribs) 08:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 May 2013

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

(WP:BLP violation removed)

76.167.45.97 (talk) 01:43, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.- Camyoung54 ^talk 02:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Slayer's first video was not Seasons in the Abyss. It was War Ensemble, which I saw the debut of.

There's plenty of footage available online to confirm this. Araya speaks of it in videos on youtube where they had to mime the song several times which angered the fans, so they ended up playing the song. This was debuted on headbanger's ball worldwide as Slayer's first music video. Seasons in the Abyss came out right after that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.66.31 (talk) 07:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Speed metal (redux)

I'll give it a shot. I guess one problem is that a lot of sites treat speed and thrash metal as interchangeable, but some of these should suffice. According to the reliable sources page, MTV is considered one, and here's a source you could possibly use. The Allmusic bio refers to Reign in Blood as speed metal, even though Show No Mercy is generally considered their speed metal album, but whatever. The Live Undead review mentions them as a speed metal band. Here's an articles from. I don't know about this book, but here it is anyway. I didn't really want to link this one since it treats speed metal and thrash metal as the same. Hare are articles from The NY Times, Pop Matters, Guitar World, The Telegram, Revolver, and a quote from producer Rick Rubin on a Terrorizer article.

The next two may not really count when it comes to determining genres, but I'll mention them anyway: I've seen Mark Prindle used as a source in certain articles, so I'll link this as well. I've also seen some mentions of Guy Peters who wrote this. SonOfPlisskin (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Slayer. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070930165251/http://www.rockdetector.com/officialbio,8189.sm to http://www.rockdetector.com/officialbio,8189.sm

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Undisputed Attitude, a full studio album?

I find it hard that Undisputed Attitude is a full studio album. I mean, yes it has 3 new tracks but those 3 tracks were really, really old for that time since they were written around 1984-1985. Also, most of the songs are cover songs from punk bands. It's Slayer's Garage Inc and it's not really a real seventh studio album by Slayer. I also had been on other internet websites and they called Repentless their 11th studio album and not the 12th. However, on this site it says there 12th album when it's not. I think I am going to changed this. Mikeis1996 (talk) 17:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

The definition of studio album does not mean "new songs" nor "original songs" — it merely suggests an artist went into one or a few studios with the intention of recording tracks for an album regardless of the content. Wikipedia does not recognize "cover album" as a type, nor do most discography websites [1][2][3]. Your comparison to Metallica's Garage Inc. does not hold much weight here as that album is a collection of songs that were recorded over the course of at least a decade that weren't necessarily recorded with the intent of being sold as an album at the time of each recording — as such, it's categorized as a "compilation" as it compiles these scattered recordings. Fezmar9 (talk) 17:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Just a note on Garage inc, one of the two discs featured (then) newly recorded songs intended for that release, so I would say that by your definition, the status of that album is a bit more subjective. That said, I personally do not consider either a proper studio album, in the classic sense.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 22:53, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Could I change it or leave it how it is? I do have a lot of sources that says, Repentless is the 11th studio album by Slayer. Mikeis1996 (talk) 23:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Leave it as is. There are also sources that count Repentless as the twelfth Slayer album and you obviously don't have consensus for that action.--Retrohead (talk) 09:25, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2015

This edit request to Slayer has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

186.13.6.158 (talk) 19:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC) EL ESTILO DE LA BANDA SLAYER ES UNA MEZCLA DE THRASH METAL, HARDCORE Y METAL EXTREMO.

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.
In addition, please remember that this is the English Wikipedia. All posts here should be in English. If you are looking for the Spanish Wikipedia please go here. --Stabila711 (talk) 19:57, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Consensus on album releases

This back and forth on album numbers from Undisputed Attitude to Repentless is becoming rather irritating. Is there no way to reach some consensus and then put a stop to this constant reverting? Rob van vee 18:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Guitarists of Slayer

Okay, I think anyone who knows Slayer knows that every guitarist they've had is lead and rhythm, so please stop labeling Kerry King as a rhythm guitarist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.10.174 (talk) 20:41, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Slayer. 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:55, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Slayer. 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071001004121/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=56141 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=56141

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Slayer. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 21:49, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Slayer. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 20:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Timeline Graphic Unreadable

There's an issue with the timeline graphic, where the black lines zig outward over the band member names. I don't know how to fix it?

Alchemista2 (talk) 21:44, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 29 external links on Slayer. 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) 18:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)