Talk:System of a Down discography/Archive 1

Archive 1

Merge

WP:MERGE Suggest merge into System of a Down --John Nagle 17:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

This article is already merged with System of a Down. Joelito 17:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, there's an ambiguity. I'm suggesting merging System of a down discography into System of a Down. Take a look at that one, please. It mostly duplicates this one. --John Nagle 17:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Merging "discography" into main article

System of a Down discography is mostly duplicated in System of a Down. Suggested merge as housekeeping operation, but merge tag was deleted. So a "disputed merge" tag has been inserted. Please discuss. Thanks. --John Nagle 02:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

• • I agree. I think they should be merged immediately.Hezzy 23:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Merging "discography" into main article

I agree, if merged in a compact way, for example, the chart positions are disposable. Skateordie 03:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you should eliminate the chart positions section, that's an important research tool I use.

I notice other artists (both bands and singers) have the discography on the same page as the artist info, and it seems a much easier way of viewing the SOAD information. For instance, see Green Day. Thanks, Woodgreener 13:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Apparently it has been merged. In fact, there is more information there. Redirect? VdSV9•♫ 20:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• I agree with most people here, a merge would be warranted, and in fact is mostly done. The only significant thing remaining is to make sure the chart position for each single is listed in that single's article, and perhaps merging it with the Singles subsection on the main article. -- H·G (^words/_works) 18:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no need to merge, see how it is now. This page is intended to keep the other page smaller and also to give it a cleaner appearence, eventually the other article (system of a down) will have been expanded so much it will become to big so by adding this it will be too big. Leave as it is. Childzy ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 19:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

• I really dont see the point of having two smaller articles. Its not hard to scroll a web page up and down and there are links to the main headings from the top of the article. IMO its much more user friendly and intuitive to have all the info in the same place. The only place I see it being valuable to separate the discography into a separate page is when the main article is huge and the discography is also huge (ie. more than 50-100 entries.) SoaD is nowhere near that big. Shu

I suggest doing it like the Green Day article, have the studio albums on the main page and keep the discography for everything else, plus extra information on the albums. User:Chipstick

Split the Demos into a seprate artical?

I really didn't think deleteting them all was a good idea but may I suggest that they be merged into an artical like, "System of a Down Demos" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.8.148.160 (talk) 23:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

Fair use rationale for Image:SYSTEMOFADOWN.jpg

Image:SYSTEMOFADOWN.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2017

{{subst:trim|

PeachyKeen12 (talk) 23:12, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

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. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)