Talk:Sounding the Seventh Trumpet

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum

Metal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal

Bass Players

I don't understand why kids keep trying to messing up the bass player in this album. Justin Sane (Justin Meacham) recorded Sounding the Seventh Trumpet, not Dameon Ash nor Justin Geever. (If you think that Dameon Ash recorded the album because the Hopeless Records reissue mentions him, you need to read closer. The booklet clearly says that he does not appear in the album and that Justin Sane recorded the bass.) The article used to be right a while ago, and it listed all the right people. If you became a fan of the band after 2006, please avoid messing with the articles. This place does not need your contribution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.252.39.253 (talk) 06:35, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re-issue?

So, I recently downloaded this album (I bought it, I was just wanted smaller files). However, the downloaded version sounds really different from the MP3s I bought. Was the re-issued version rerecorded or remixed in any way, or did I just get some odd files? Fumbingehmer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fumbingehmer (talk • contribs) 03:05, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, the only difference is the way "To End The Rapture" is played. The original version of the album had a piano version, and the re-release had a heavy metal version. Bramblestar (ShadowClan Leader) (talk) 03:29, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

there is also a different version of "Lips Of Deceit". On One version, not sure which, the intro is more synthed and the vocals too, on the other the intro is totally guitars and the vocals are harsher. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Immersivepreview (talk • contribs) 13:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ststoriginal.jpg

Image:Ststoriginal.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 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 05:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kerrang! rating edit.

Stop changing the rating from 1 star to 3.5. I have the magazine, it has CLEARLY one star on the review. Obvious bias here to boost ratings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tordah16 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

I need some help dealing with the reception section of this article page. The backstory is that I deleted the reception section under the pretenses that it was original research with unencyclopedic information and unconstructive comparisons. "The album sold well for a debut album" is comparing this album's sales to unknown, unidentified, unspecified other debut albums and is thus unconstructive. The section goes on to unverified comparisons to AFI and gives it a genre that is clearly not backed up by any proof. Then, the reception section continues to cite possible influences of the album's music. There is something wrong with that because it is not confirmed that this album is influenced by those select bands; the sound could almost just as easily be influenced by other bands. And there is that "touch of goth" stuff", which simply never belongs on wikipedia. What is just as bad, if not worse, is that talking about the music's influences should never be in the "reception" section, considering how information about the music itself (including its inspiration[s]) and the reception of the album's music are two separathe aspects of the album. Whenever I have taken away this seciont, my taking away gets reverted by an anonymous editor who is vehemently behind keeping it. In the most recent (as of this post) adding of the reception section, there were six sources added which would "refute" it being original research. The sources did not follow the wikipedia guidelines, because of the following reasoning stated in one of my edit summaries:

“

1. A myspace group (forum) isn't reliable. 2. It has this article on its site. 3. It is a compilative review site. 4. It is a REVIEW not even about this album. 5 and 6. They're broken links.

”

By the way, I have reason to believe that the anonymous editor supporting the reception section has been editing this page under 12 different briefly-lasting anonymous names (maybe not intentionally, but it's still worth posting). The anonymous names are all of the 216.12 calibre and the edit summaries are all very similar and all starting with "a correction of the ______________" The earliest edit (s)he has done was on 15 April 2009 at 05:02. This anonymous editor is adamant, and I am asking for some help dealing with this conflict. Thanks.

By, the way, I will add that I am welcome to hearing the input from 216.12 to see why he supports the keeping of the reception section, and hopefully this conflict of interests can be resolved soon.

Backtable _{Speak to me}^{concerning my deeds.} 02:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection

Glancing through these Avenged Sevenfold album pages, it appears that there are consistent edit wars regarding spurious information, particularly with regards to songwriting contributions. It might be an idea for a regular Wikipedian who knows how to put protection on these pages to do so, as there is a lack of uniformity and a lack of citations with regards to this so-called “information”, both of which are a concern on this website. 109.150.162.237 (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sounding the Seventh Trumpet. 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) 07:46, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sounding the Seventh Trumpet. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303195413/http://ivanzjnonkz.multiply.com/reviews to http://ivanzjnonkz.multiply.com/reviews

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) 08:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]