Talk:Fake?

FAKE?

The band's name is FAKE? and I think this is what confused some in the RCP. They have a website which shows their albums which I believe are self-produced. (I haven't looked further into this). Their discography can be found here: http://www.hedfuc.com/discography/ and here is one of their album covers: stepping.jpg Their history tourdates can be found under the Biography section. I can't read japanese and google translation usually gives strange results with japanese. If there is someone who here who can read japanese, outside sources of media coverage would help establish notability. --ElectricEye 20:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay call me crazy but pages on stuff like "Fart" and "Asshat" (redirected to Asshole) are written almost comically professional, yet "FAKE? is a Japanese rock band of the alternative rock/punk and sometimes mixed with a bit of electronic stuff" is in a band page. O_o --71.242.177.109 08:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions

I removed most the genres from the box - I would say go with no more than 3 of the most prominant ones. I'll leave which ones up for debate. The Japanese resource I had called them "Mixed Rock" - which is a term I have heard in Japan many times (Mixed Rock, Mixed Music, etc). For the History - most of that can be found just by looking at their album and single release list! I would suggest not listing every release for now, until we can find things to say about them. Examples "XYZ release which hit on this chart" or "XYZ release where they first included this type of sound". Otherwise the reading is just too dry. I tried to copy edit but not remove too much information. Denaar 01:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Links to external web pages (other than the official one) shouldn't be put in the band info box. Or anywhere else other than external links. Denaar 22:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Fake? style and external links

about the Fake? genre....I dont beleive the most of here listen the band like for say their genre, specially when the jrock isnt a genre if no the rock from japan, but that would be compare dir en grey and laruku, both are bands from japan(japanese rock band) but are genres opposites....affirm it, it would be say that the american band is a genre, the british band is a genre, etc....if is that, should them erase all and in band each put up only that genre(american band, swedish band, etc..)...that would be stupid, because are diifferents.

I dont want to start a "fight" among different peolple visions. But, might anyone who edited the genres listen some song of the band ??? I dont beleive..

plus, on wikipedia there are a lot bands/singers with specific genres like:

Aphex Twin
The Prodigy
Björk

Besides, the extertnal links here arent SPAM or have illegal stuff, since give extra info and latest news about the band in ENGLISH( the official web only give info in japanese) and should be considered as sources and dont erase them. --Maestrotaku 15:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

One site is Italian, one site is an unofficial blog, per WP:EL - "Links to English language content are strongly preferred in the English-language Wikipedia. It may be appropriate to have a link to a non-English-language site, such as when an official site is unavailable in English; or when the link is to the subject's text in its original language..." "Links normally to be avoided - Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority." The blog doesn't seem to a scholarly blog, just a fan page.

I already responded to the rest on my talk page, where you originally posted this. Note that the Aphex Twin page has had a long history of discussion and fights about its long "list of genres". Denaar 16:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

mmm....http://community.livejournal.com/taste_maximum/profile is a site with news and translations , NO blog and/or personal web and the same users fix the pssibles mistakes(like wikipedia).

about the genres: at the same JAME if you read everything says: alternative rock, punk rock and at JMI says: electronic, pop band

--Maestrotaku 17:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Jame calls them Alternative, but neither source called them Electronica. Electronic elements in songs is not the same thing as being Electronica. Just like if someone uses some Jazzy elements to their songs, that doesn't make them Jazz. As for JMI - Info from JMI I think that page says it all. Denaar 17:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Edit: Also - Livejournal is user editted and not professional. Denaar 17:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I changed it to "Alternative" and "Experimental" as a compromise, the rest are in the body of the article. I told you before you could pick any three you wanted - but I still think it would be better to source the information. Denaar 01:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

about Info from JMI,similar says at JAME, therefore i dont know what is your point....are similar sites, both have things goods and mistakes....might you or any friend work on JAME???--Maestrotaku 14:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Quite a few people I know dislike JAME, but that is neither here nor there. I don't think I know anyone that works for them. Radiohead has electronic music as a genre, and even though I disagree with that, I'll conceed to it's use here. Would Alternative, Experimental, and then either Electronica or Electronic Music be acceptable? We have Trip Hop included in the article (which from the description, would fall under electronica/elecronic music but be more focused - since some of this band's sound is just straight forward rock songs I think it would be better in the body of the article with more explanation). We can then work on finding more sources. I would say: Let's find the most reliable sources for as much information in this article as possible. I like to use JAME as a last resort once all the other sources we can find are exhausted, or when it agrees with something already written in a Japanese source (so people can confirm the information if they don't read Japanese). I have double checked a lot of information from JAME, and haven't found many errors - they tend to get nasty emails if something is wrong. I don't think JMI is as well known, so I'm still a bit questionable about it's quality. I think it just doesn't have the reputation and track record yet. This band is big enough I think we'll be able to source most the info. Denaar 21:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

you say:"I don't think JMI is as well known, so I'm still a bit questionable about it's quality", but that isnt a good reasson for says is wrong, therefore "yes" should be a true source, unless give me references because JAME is OK and JMI is wrong....futhermore, jame wheter have mistakes, an example would be if you read the Oblivion Dust biography and then compare it with JAME, first the line up at JAME says:

Vocal : Ken Lloyd

Guitar : Kaz

Bass : Rikiji

Bass : Ju-ken [support member]

Guitar : Masaru [gone : 2001]

Drums : Furuton [gone : 2001]

Drums : Taka [gone : 1998]

Bass : Rikiji [gone : 2000]

Bass : Matt Garrett [gone : 1997]

Bass : Derek Forves [gone : 1997]

that have a lot of mistakes(might you know a band with 2 bassist??)

the current line up is:

Vocal : Ken Lloyd

Guitar : Kaz

Bass : Rikiji

Guitar:Pablo(supoport member)

Drums: Masuo(supoport member)

Ju-ken was support member only in 2001, now no and Rikiji gone 2000, but now is back in the current line up.

Besides says: "the only member from the original lineup who lasted till the end was the vocalist, Ken" and "With the coming of 1998, two new members joined Oblivion Dust: Kaz (who earlier played with hide and the Spread Beaver)" that is FAKE, because if you read is interview with Jer Koozie(a former member that isnt mentioned in that wrong biography) he speak about Kaz Iwaike in 1996(if you have some doubt, you can ask him directly at his Official Myspace ) and in the KAZ biography at his official web he wrote about Oblivion Dust started in september 1996 with him as member(then he joined in Hide with Spread Beaver as guitarrist, but follows as Oblivion Dust member) since ealier the band had another name(another thing JAME no mentioned) according to Derek Forbes(JAME had another mistake writting his last name like Forves) wrote on myspace with date 20 november 2006.

like you can see that biography has a lot of mistakes, I guess if i check all the biographies at JAME i would find a lot of mistakes.

--Maestrotaku 14:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) Try reading what I wrote again - again, I said JAME is only ok in certain conditions: to confirm, in English, reliable Japanese sources OR when all other sources have been exhausted. Denaar 14:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

but you doubt about the quality of JMI in opposite to JAME without give me goods reassons, only say: JAME is known and JMI no....come on man...give me references

--Maestrotaku 15:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

FAKE? supports merge

The page for the support members should probably be merged with this one. It has no real substantial value being separate, and the page is incorrectly formatted in many ways in the first place. --Jacob ^Talk 23:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fake?. 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/20071116033241/http://www.kaz1011.com/biography.html to http://www.kaz1011.com/biography.html

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) 20:42, 27 September 2017 (UTC)