Talk:List of Metalocalypse episodes/Archive 1

Archive 1

Number of episodes

I'm confused about something, I have every episode of Metalocalypse that has aired so far and I only have 46 episodes, can someone explain to me why the article states there are 48 episodes. Also http://www.dethklok.org/the-episodes/ states there has only been 46. Snakes N Barrels II is not a 2 part episode and neither is Black Fire upon us, can someone edit the page to show only 46 episodes 80.229.169.189 (talk) 14:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Is there something stopping you? AzureFury (talk | contribs) 17:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I just did it, very complicated. 80.229.169.189 (talk) 17:29, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

A little learning for a sense of accomplishment. Fair trade I think. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 18:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I had to edit it again, some other users edited it back. Just to clarify, there are no 2 part episodes of Metalocalypse 80.229.169.189 (talk) 18:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Episode articles

A lot of shows that are this popular get episode articles so let's create them. I would do some work but I need help.

screenshots

i don't actually have any. but i think the best would be the shot when the band is inside the grocery store for the first episode, and a picture of either the mutant seahorse, or toki "isolated" in that box for ep#2. Eirik Raude 05:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I managed to add screens for episodes 3-5, I'll try to add more at a later date. -Zach Zachington 21:49, 11 December 2006

The trivia section disappeared again after you added those screenshots, Zach. Swordsmanus 05:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

For good reason. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 06:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

That's heavily debatable, as evidenced below. 68.116.250.216 22:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Lake Bodom

Where does it suggest or state in episode 4 that Lake Bodom is the one from which the troll rises? Also, there's quite a few metal bands from Espoo, it's a big city, why continually single out Children of Bodom? --Burbster 11:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Dethkomedy reference

I think Murderface's onstage antics were more in the vein of GG Allin, rather than that guy from Rammstein. Not only was GG Allin known to bash microphones against his head, he was also infamous for throwing his own feces at the audience. Akira 07:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Not to mention that Murderface was naked while doing so, something that GG Allin constantly did during shows.

Ok, the article now contains references to both. For now I'll combine both into one item of trivia, unless everyone feels the Rammstein one should be deleted. -Stu

The statement "It was probably a reference to Lindemann, since GG Allin made mostly punk rock, whereas Rammstein more fits the heavy metal feel of the show" is an interjection of opinion. It should be deleted unconditionally, as both Rammstein and GG are referenced without it.

Avoiding conclusion jumping

This page has numerous speculative references listed as absolutes with no more than speculation to back them up. We need to keep in mind that unless one of the creators makes a statement, or the reference is made obvious with a direct quote another work, we're just guessing. Here's a few examples.

1. Clear and indisputable: The Finntroll reference in "Curse of Deathklok" is a clear and indisputable reference as it directly quotes the name of that band. Whereas the possiblity that the entire plot of "Deathtroll" is another reference to Finntroll is made more likely by that first reference.
2. Less clear, but likely: References to Finnish band Children of Bodom's home town of Espoo in "Deathtroll."
3. Hardly definite: The "I'm aware of my tongue!" line in "Snakes 'n' Barrels." Possibly a reference to MST3K, but not definite because it is a concept referenced in other, earlier, works. For instance, there is a famous "Peanuts" strip in which Linus said, "I’m aware of my tongue ... It’s an awful feeling! Every now and then I become aware that I have a tongue inside my mouth, and then it starts to feel lumped up ... I can’t help it ... I can’t put it out of my mind. ..." To me, this is a much more likely reference, if it even is a reference.

Hope these guidelines help. And now that I've made "Peanuts" metal, I bid you adieu. --Boradis 07:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Dethtroll - Amorphis reference

I noticed no one picked up on the reference Nathan makes about taking the lyrics about resurrecting the Troll from ancient texts as a reference to the band Amorphis to took tons of their lyrics on 'Tales From The Thousland Lakes' and 'Elegy' from ancient Finnish texts. LK Thurisaz 14:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I did but I added the trivia blurb to the Allusions section of the Metalocalypse tv.com guide which I edit. It was in the episode trivia here at one time but someone deleted it and I guess it never was added back. --carpeNoctem 05:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

The hell? "Trivia's not necessary" so the whole section just gets deleted? Maybe should have consulted the discussion page first about that before you just hack off half an article. For the record, one of Metalocalypse's most amusing aspects is all the subtle, even well-camouflaged references to various aspects of the metal genre, which is most certainly worth keeping. I'll be reverting this if nobody else objects. 209.129.117.2 01:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

It's gotten ridiculously excessive, and style guidelines actually recommend against such sections. Even if the references are to pop culture, only the most important of them should be included, like the troll's name, and should be included in the summary as a short parenthetical. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 01:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it should be kept. --141.209.196.70 07:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

the trivia section has gotten rather large. i think separate episode pages would be a good idea, with the specific trivia within. the spongebob squarepants and simpsons episode articles are well-done and good resources as to what to include in the pages. cma 08:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I second that motion. Considering that, as of today, Metalocalypse is Adult Swim's second most popular Sunday original programming (behind Robot Chicken) and fourth most popular programming entirely (behind Family Guy and Futurama, respectively), it's definately worth pursuing.66.27.106.77 10:00, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Separate episode articles? What are you going to put in it? We don't need extremely detailed plot summaries or lists of inane trivial factoids. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 10:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and created [very simple at this point] seperate episode articles and removed the trivia. The nessecity is simply because the trivia section had gotten too large and within episode articles we can adhere more to rules of style. The refrences within in the show are rather numerous and are the kind of thing that i have looked to wikipedia for in the past. --NeoVampTrunks 18:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Allright, whatever, seemed like a good idea to me. --NeoVampTrunks 19:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

You need to make an article to accompany the trivia. Just stuffing the trivia in another article does nothing. What it actually needs is to be trimmed. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 20:29, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia first and foremost. The article is called "List of Metalocalypse episodes", not "Metalocalypse episodes and trivia". Major, unquestionable references spanning the entire series should be grouped together in the main article (such as, "Many locations are named after existing bands, such as the Finntroll grocery store or the Gorgoroth wheelchair outlet."). Episode-specific references, speculation, and trivia should be eliminated completely. There are plenty of other websites where knowledgeable fans can freely discuss possible references and hidden meanings without creating clutter for everyone else. FinalMinuet 21:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

why don't the people who are working on all the metalocalypse related pages begin to create pages for each episode. put the trivia there. i'll start a couple. Patrick (talk) 05:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Please take it to a fan wiki. Things you noticed by watching the show carefully are not encyclopedic material. Whether you cram it into this list or individual episode articles, if it doesn't have a source (and "watch the show!" isn't a source), it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. The nice little "original research" tag isn't permission to keep adding the stuff you noticed one day; it's a warning that if nobody comes up with sources, then the content may be removed or drastically changed. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

alright, alright. but i have tried to make an episode page. i've come up with some templates, but they don't seem to be working together. this is my first episode page creation, and metalocalypse's first too. if anyone can help here's the templates. Template:Infobox Metalocalypse Season 1 Template:Infobox Metalocalypse episode and i've been trying to get this working in my sandbox, User:The Dougler/Sandbox Patrick (talk) 05:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

What are you going to put in these episode articles? We don't need longer episode summaries (the episodes are 12 minutes long for crying out loud), we surely don't need the trivia again, we don't need lists of "goofs" and such (that belongs on TVtome, not Wikipedia), and there just aren't any sources.

There's nothing to put in an episode article besides unencyclopedic junk. Please don't do this. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

alright, alright. i just thought that most other cartoons out there have pages for individual episodes, ie south aprk, family guy, ect. i don't see how metalocalypse is any different or how the show being 12 minutes long has anything to do with it. it still has a story, plot, ect. but thats just my opinion. if the people who edit metalocalypse don't want individual pages, than screw it. Patrick (talk) 03:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Those articles are equally awful, though. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

There's at least one Dethklok forum with a dedicated trivia/references thread: Dethklok forum. Seems more appropriate there than here.cybersybil 01:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you're all smoking crack. Plenty of other wiki's have similar section, regardless if they're also "ridiculous." Nevermind that there's a point where you're just taking things too seriously. To remove the trivia section is an act of idiocy; It's like removing the paint from a wall because it's not 'necessary'. Oh well, thanks for ruining the best part of this wiki. Now it's trash. If you're going to go through life nitpicking everything, then I don't see how you're ever going to have an open enough mind to be successful. Nor do I understand how you could even be a fan of a show like this, it's improper format must drive you mental! Klisk 07:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Trivia was the best part of this page and it is an integral part of the show and the show's popularity. I think it should be kept. 7 Nov 2006

For crying out loud, people. Okay, so other pages have triva listed. That's nice, but does it conform to the standards of Wikipedia, or the rules for templates of those types of pages? If they don't, then they're not needed, and should be deleted. Just because you feel that something should be added, doesn't make an end-all to the discussion. There are templates for how pages are to look, and rules for what kind of content can be on those pages; follow them, or don't create/edit articles. Just because you think it's important doesn't make it important. Wikipedians before you have come up with a set of rules for how pages are to look, and what content should/can be on those pages; choosing to disobey what they have done/decided is horrible. I suggest you read up on all of this before adding new information or creating articles, unless you want to have your work deleted or altered. In fact, aren't you told that when you register for Wikipedia that you should not edit/create articles unless you're willing to have your work severely edited, critiqued, or possibly even deleted all together?

Make sure you know the rules for creating new articles, as well as what content can appear in that article and how it is to appear, before doing ANYTHING. If you didn't do that before making an article, don't bitch and moan to everyone else just because your work was altered or deleted by someone else. Instead, LEARN from the experience, and do better next time.

Finally, if trivia for the episodes can be found at an external site, I suggest we link to that site for anyone who might be interested in said trivia. -- ModernTenshi04 13:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I cannot believe the trivia section is just completely GONE. Part of the appeal and fun of this show is all the inside-jokes and cultural references only metal heads or fans of music and cult movies would catch as they watch the episodes. That section was very informative and educational to both die-hard fans and casual viewers alike in cataloging an interesting list of references and allusions. Always remember if you want to add any things like that which you feel questionable about whether they belong in the wikipedia guide, there's a place for them in the Allusions section for episodes at the Metalocalypse guide at tv.com which I just so happen to be Editor of. Just a thought. I managed to save most of the trivia by adding it to the appropriate episodes there. It is still good information regardless if it fits with wikipedia's format or not and it should at least appear somewhere. --carpeNoctem 05:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

TV.com is fine for such info. It doesn't need to be here. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 06:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

It would be nice to at least provide a link to some of these websites on the main page. Under no circumstances should you assume your average wiki-reader knows where those websites are(and in your mind they're obviously not 1337 enough). Lots of average people will come to this article looking for trivia, not because that's what wiki is, but because so many other articles have the trivia. if we're going to be super-anal about keeping this specific article conforming to wikipedia standards, we need to provide external links that are labeled as such to provide trivia. --NeoVampTrunks 18:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I keep trying to introduce a link to the Metalocalypse guide at tv.com but someone keeps deleting it. So it never remains.

--carpeNoctem 23:12, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

As a parody of the death metal genre in general, inane, trivial references are basically all this show is. Throw those out and you may as well trim the entire article down to a an "encyclopedic" and wholly useless stub. It would seem to me that what we have here is another one-man crusade to take a perfectly functional wiki page that doesn't 100% match their interpretation of the relevant policies and effectively ruin it in the name of being "encyclopedic." This same thing happened a while back when one delightful Wikipedian decided that Gundam mechanical designs were "unencyclopedic" and started deleting the things by the dozen. Is that a precedent we really want to set? I think not. 209.129.117.2 09:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

There you go, changed the name. No longer the broad heading trivia, but the succinct heading Metal References. Which it is. The bands mentioned deserve a link that anyone who looks up the show can see, not hidden away on some episodes page or a link to a forum. A direct link to the wiki article on the band suits the purpose, from there fans can look further into the music that may well have shaped Dethklok

episode 5 production code?

is ep. 5's production code 106? is this 100% sure and confirmed?

No clue. I removed it until a source can be found. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 05:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

http://www.tv.com/metalocalypse/show/62049/episode_listings.html?tag=tabs;episodes this is where that person found it from, so i guess tv.com is a pretty reliable source

I am the Editor for the tv.com Metalocalypse guide and all the episode production codes were taken directly from Adult Swim's site. --carpeNoctem 23:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Demon Hunter reference?

Did anyone else see the Demon Hunter logo tattoo on one of the DethKlok roadies in episode 12, "Murdering Outside The Box", at the motivational speach? I'm not sure if it's a reference or just a similar looking tattoo, but would anyone happen to have a screenshot to back this up or to compare it to?

(A good clear example of said logo can be seen on their first CD. Demon Hunter (album)

Skull Full Of Maggots

"Dethklok's new song featured in this episode, Briefcase Full of Guts, is a possible reference to Cannibal Corpse's Skull Full of Maggots."

The only resemblance is the "x full of y" construction. That's the same as saying "Scuba Tank Full of Fart" is also a reference to SFOM, or "Scaled, Gutted, and Undercooked" is a reference to Stripped Raped and Strangled. SAlpsu 20:44, 26 October 2006

Which they could easily be. Your last one especially. 217.155.235.245 (talk) 15:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC) (UTC)

Truncating Episode Descriptions

According to the List of Television Episodes WikiProject, episode summaries should be kept short and relevant. There is nothing about list of episodes that implies any more than a brief summary. Check out the South Park or Simpsons episode lists and see how to-the-point they are. Keep in mind that both were featured articles. When adding new episode descriptions, please follow this style to keep things clean. FinalMinuet 02:21, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

George Fisher

It was said on Dethklok's myspace that he was supposed to be in the most recent episode "Go Forth and Die", yet I didn't recognize him in it. Anybody care to look into it?

First, please sign your comments with four tildes. As for Corpsegrinder, I'm pretty sure he voiced the guy ordering four #5's at Dimmu Burger. Some people at the Cannibal Corpse forum thought the same thing. I don't listen to Cannibal Corpse but I checked out a couple songs and that's what I came up with. FinalMinuet 20:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Episodes 115-117???

Where are these descriptions from? They seem to be a joke of sorts. --74.129.222.94 02:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the descriptions were different when you viewed them and left this on the talkback but the episode descrptions seem to be fine now. Someone keeps trying to vandalise by replacing Murderface with Dr. Zoidberg for the episode "Religionklok" though. --carpeNoctem 06:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Endless trivia back and forth

Technically, once something is reverted in and out 3 times the issue is supposed to go to committee - this trivia stuff has gone in and out at least that many.

Have fun.

MGlosenger 04:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

We covered it a few sections up. It's ridiculously excessive. It's just the one editor constanty restoring it. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 04:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

There is more than one of us in support of the information though, we're just too scared of coming under your flame wars. i've decided that i'm in support, but i'm not going to argue because i'll never win. --NeoVampTrunks 06:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Any trivia list so ridiculously long doesn't belong in the first place. No trivia section should drawf the article subject so completely. Just see WP:TRIV. What in that excessively long list matters at all to the article content? – Someguy0830 (T | C) 06:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who likes the trivia enough could easily have a call for arbitration, or whatever it's called - ditto for the other side. Either trivia or trivia-free works for me. MGlosenger 07:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I think as long as trivia sections are allowed on every other TV show article I've seen, then it should be allowed. If a show happens to warrant more trivia than another, then so be it. Why not create a new article specifically for Metalocalypse trivia if there is so much trivia from the show, then just keep the trivia section, and have a message there saying "for trivia from Metalocalypse please see "Metalocalypse Trivia" (linking to the article obviously). If that isn't a good idea, then just have a link to an external site that lists all of the trivia listed on here. Karpsmom 07:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

The Metalocalypse TV.com link is at the bottom and its trivia encompasses everything this trivia section does and more. Furthermore, it's designed for such a purpose, while this site clearly frowns upon it. Also, the fact that trivia is not taken care of on other articles does not mean we should be negligent here. Trivia should be merged when useful and deleted when useless. What about this trivia is useful to the article, or even the series at large? – Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, if your decision is to keep the trivia at the link, you should at least elaborate that the link has trivia. I know I had no clue where the trivia went until I explored that link. Wastrel 01:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 01:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

At least we've got a link to websites better suited for the nature of the amount of trivia per episode. I'd still like to see this expanded into a more in-depth set of pages; see Futurama's episode lists for instance. They're not very big, but they do maintain all the noteable trivias and references for those who might not have "gotten" them, which I believe greatly enhances the viewing experience. 209.129.117.2 05:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

"I think as long as trivia sections are allowed on every other TV show article I've seen, then it should be allowed." You know there's a clause in Wikipedia policy specifically denying this kind of logic be allowed in discussions. What happens in other articles is irrelevant here. Fact is there's just too much trivia and garbage throughout Wikipedia. --88.108.232.211 (talk) 18:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Trivia's gone

So why can't anyone agree on the trivia? 166.102.136.59 15:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Dammit, people, if you refuse to have ANY trivia on the Metalocalypse pages for some idiot reason, you should at least have a TV.com link where such information is easily available. Either keep the link or bring back the trivia! MalikCarr 21:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Japanese translation

Can anyone translate the Japanese language text on Pickles' green hachimaki in the "Dethstars" episode? Chris 07:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• It says Pickles (more acuratly Pikuurusu), its simply his name in Katakana.Unitg3d 15:14, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Episode Order

On December 31, Adult Swim aired a Metalocalypse marathon with the episodes in a different order. The article currently lists the episodes chronologically by air date. Adult swim put "Murdering Outside the Box" after "Dethtroll" and before "Dethkomedy." Also "Religionklok" and "Dethkids" were switched.

By the way, other than order of air date, what is the source of the production code and episode number? Are these the numbers Adult Swim provided? — Kjammer ⌂ 22:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering about that, too but then I realized that they just made a mistake.75.31.77.172 21:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there a way to note that change in episode order? Searching "episode 5" on Google video brings up "Dethkomedy", while "Murdering Outside the Box" brings up vidos marked "episode 12", which is rather confusing to one wishing to watch the episodes in the show creator's intended order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.190.118 (talk) 15:33, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

incomplete summaries?

These summaries are all written with cliff-hanger-like ending that don't actually say what happened. I don't think its Wikipedia's concern to avoid potential spoilers --in fact these summaries almost read like studio-provided material. I suggest writing them out more --not too much, but enough so a person knows the key facts of episode. --216.9.250.105 04:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with rewriting them a little better while providing some key-facts, but I think we shouldn't spoil too much. Dethfan216 18:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers are not a concern for Wikipedia. People should expect a summary, not a tagline. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 22:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the summaries are like something you'd read in a tv mag or something, there is no detail at all.--Will Decay (talk) 19:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I've begun completing the summaries. I'm using the episodes themselves as a primary source, I don't think anyone will object. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 10:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

dethwedding already aired

april 1st adult swim played new episodes of a lot of shows unannounced one being metalocalypse just wondering if everyone knows —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkfloyd32389 (talk • contribs) 03:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Guest voice redundancy

Is it really necessary to have guests' bands listed after every single credit? If anyone wants to know what band they're from, they can just click on their name. There's especially no reason to have 3 to 4 bands after Vortex's name in every episode he's been in. cma (talk) 07:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

DVD Release Season 3

Season		Episodes	Originally Aired	DVD Release Date
	3	10	2009 – 2010	November 8 2009

November 8, 2009 can't be right, can it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virus of Profanity (talk • contribs) 22:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

That's the day it first aired, definitely not the day the S3 DVD was released. Feel free to just delete that part of the table, until we have confirmation that Season 3 will be released on DVD there's no reason to have it on the page. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 14:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Airdates

Seeing as Metalocalypse airs at 12:30 am for season 3, should the dates be shifted forward one day as they are technically premiering on Monday morning and not Sunday night?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Please note this date difference only applies to the Eastern Time zone in the U. S. airdates. — MrBucket^T/_C 01:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Dethdeath?

The possibly mythical sixth episode of season 3. Is there a reliable source that proves the existence of this episode? The only reference to this episode I've seen was on a fan wiki awhile back (not the one cited in the article). Couldn't find any clips or trailers on adult swim's website. Thatkid82 (talk) 09:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The anon left this link in his edit summary: http://wiki.adultswim.com/xwiki/bin/Metalocalypse/Ep+45 AzureFury (talk | contribs) 03:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

^ That IS said wiki page, and as such it isn't a reliable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.74.164.219 (talk) 05:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

It is a wiki yes, not a Wikipedia page. There's a difference. A lot of places use Wiki's these days for organization. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 07:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I left that link before (unsigned). I don't know why this keeps getting removed as unofficial. It is on the official Adult Swim website's wiki. It is not just some random page, it is the area that everyone looking for Metalocalypse is linked to from the main Adult Swim website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.115.0.158 (talk) 07:20, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find that link from the adultswim website to verify that it is official. It looks official, but for all we know it could just be some random site trying to mimic the adultswim website. Can you tell me how to go from adultswim.com to the link you sent? AzureFury (talk | contribs) 08:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

My mistake I meant that the site links to a page that looks very similar to that. I guess it can't be assumed that it belongs to the official site as the link is different (forgot to sign again last time doh) --Lakecityransom (talk) 00:17, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

It certainly does belong to Adult Swim, "wiki.adultswim.com" is a subdomain. However, I can't tell if the info in it is generated by Adult Swim of if they let anyone log in (as here) to edit. Barsoomian (talk) 18:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

There is no mention of an airdate on that page. Our page lists it in August.. is there any reason that should say that? User:Deucalion

Not that I can think of. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 04:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

References cleanup

References seem
1. Out of place: randomly inserted in the episode list
2. Unneeded (old confirmation references of episodes existing) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakecityransom (talk • contribs) 15:40, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Attempting to expand Dethvengeance

I'm trying to replace the current summary of Dethvengeance with this...

The assassin from the episode "The Metalocalypse Has Begun," is seen torturing a Klokateer, trying to find out how to get into Mordhaus. The Klokateer swallows a [[cyanide pill], ending the interrogation. It is then revealed that a UN resolution allows Dethklok to act as a police force. As a result, Klokateers begin kidnapping and torturing people who illegally download Dethklok songs from the internet. At the same time, Dethklok starts experiments with recording on water—the purest of analog formats. Every "record" is produced as a cannister of water, requiring huge amounts of power and pollution. Meanwhile, one particular fan is kidnapped by roadies and tortured at Mordhaus for pirating the group's songs, only to meet Edgar Jomfru from episode "Mordland". Edgar places a mask made of the remains of his brother's face on the fan. He and the fan escape before being found by the assassin, who carries them to safety.

But whenever I do, the formatting gets all screwed up. Anyone know why? AzureFury (talk | contribs) 04:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Resolved

AzureFury (talk | contribs) 00:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Copyvio

The page has text taken directly from the official website's descriptions of episodes. I removed as much as I could stomach reading. Episodes 1 through 26 still need checked. OlYeller^Talktome 01:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I think whoever started the article just copied all the leads for every episode. I've just been filling in the rest of the descriptions. So the first sentence or two of every episode you haven't touched is probably a direct copy and paste from the website. But does that necessarily make it a copy right violation? I'm not sure exactly how the laws work... AzureFury (talk | contribs) 01:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

This page is a mess. Again, there's text taken directly from Dethklok.org. There's a possibility that it was taken from Wikipedia but judging from the writing style and lack of evidence to the contrary, I'd say that's no the case. I hate to delete it but I don't have the patients to remove copyrighted material, again, then stay on top of this page to make sure that it's not reintroduced. OlYeller^Talktome 18:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

That may be true, but this doesn't even come close to qualifying for speedy deletion. AFD it if you like. I think the amount of material on the page that is non-infringing means the page is worth salvaging. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 18:08, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You're right. That was my mistake. I'm going to follow this line from G12 about what to do next which is reverting to a point where there was no copyright violation. We'll still have the salvageable content but won't be posting copyright material. I do think it's important to remember though that saving the content doesn't fall on me. If you want that content saved, it falls on you. OlYeller^Talktome 18:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

As I recall, an IP editor added those episode descriptions. I have no vested interest in them. Maybe I'll write something up next time they're on adultswim.com. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 22:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The page is a mess because Azurefury won't leave it the fuck alone.205.133.178.161 (talk) 01:43, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

That's completely incorrect. The page is a mess because people continually attempt to add copyrighted text to the page. If it's added, it will be reverted. If you're going to add material to the article, make it your own words. OlYeller^Talktome 12:46, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok wow, I just looked at the link you sent when you deleted Dethhealth or whatever. It is the same text on both pages for that episode, but I think they took our description, not the other way around. I swear I typed up that summary myself, except for the first sentence. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 15:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Here are 4 difs from when I created it/editted it (an anon also helped out): [1][2][3][4] AzureFury (talk | contribs) 15:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Ya, I believe you. Right before I went to lunch, I found the entry where you had rewritten the description and it seems pretty obvious that you didn't paste it in besides the fact that I seriously doubt that an experienced editor like yourself would do that. From this point forward, we'll probably just have to do a back and forth of checking to see what they copied and what other editors pasted here from there. Bleh, what a mess. OlYeller^Talktome 16:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

What would Wikipedia be without project to do :). AzureFury (talk | contribs) 16:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Haha, touche. OlYeller^Talktome 17:06, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Looks like www.dethklok.org is a fan-made site. Check out http://www.dethklok.org/about/ . Maybe all that stuff that was deleted was legit... AzureFury (talk | contribs) 17:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll check it out tonight but when I first checked, I found a date on the page that showed the last time that it was updated which is what I went off of. It even lined up with when the copyvio descriptions ended (before their listed last update, the WP descriptions were different and after that there were copyvios). What do you think about grabbing someone who's more experienced (than me at least) at copyright violations? I know a person who's very skilled and could/would probably help us. We may end up needing to go after dethklok.org for using the text with a copyright but that's outside of what I usually do. OlYeller^Talktome 18:24, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Honestly...I don't think anyone besides a few Wikipedia editors is going to care. Adultswim would probably love to see their stuff published on Wikipedia. This is not a huge priority on my list. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 19:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

A decision on copyright infringment

We have established that blogs and fan made sites will copy material from this page without attributing the material to Wikipedia. This makes it impossible to determine where writing originates from. We can't then delete material just because we see it on another site. Further, I do not think it is reasonable to delete material because it has no editor to testify its legitimacy. Many Wikipedia editors do not view the talk pages, or review their edits after they're made. Deletion is becoming hindersome to the development to this page. Hence, I recommend that unless we are specifically requested to delete material, as is required by copyright law prior to a lawsuit, we give the benefit of the doubt to additions to this page. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 06:04, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I think that you feel that WP is less of a project if the description isn't filled in immediately. WP is a work in progress with no deadline meaning that we don't have to push the envelope, especially when it comes to copyright infringement to fill in the blanks.

As for proving where the text originates from, that's mostly irrelevant in my opinion. If the page its on does not expressly give permission for others to use the text, they're claiming to own it (it doesn't have to say "copyright"). It's then our duty to either prove that we had it here first and get them to take it down, rewrite the text (by far the easiest method), or remove the text.

I think that your comments suggesting that we just let it go or look the other way speak volumes. I'm not cool with that.

I've asked others to come and help with the page and give their input so it's not just you and I trying to come to a conclusion. OlYeller^Talktome 04:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

We won't be deleting material from this page because you can find it on some blog elsewhere on the internet. And I'm not going to fish through the history every time you allege copyright infringment. Do your own work. If you're looking for something to do on Wikipedia, your efforts are either wasted or unproductive here. Look for an RFC or something. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 04:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Dethsiduals Copyvio

This website has the text verbatim and claims that it was posted at 12:40 AM on October 4th. The first time the text appears on WP as it does on this website is at 12:47 AM on October 4th. If we disagree in the future on where text came from, let's talk it out here so that we don't get in any unneeded edit wars. OlYeller^Talktome 04:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Two diffs of the text beind constructed here on Wikipedia: [5][6]. Way to fail to check the history even after I told you the proof was there. Much easier to make someone else do your work for you isn't it? Enough of your pointless zeal. You can stop bringing bob's metalocalypse site as evidence of copyright infringement. A lot of anons make edits here. The article is intentionally obviously incomplete, inviting people to add episode descriptions. You can expect your deletions to reverted in the future. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 04:39, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Whoa, let's take it down a notch. Providing me with the proof would have obviously solved the problem long before this explosion. I haven't checked your proof yet but I'm going to assume that you've done the work and I somehow made a mistake. As for saying that you'll be reverting my deletions in the future, I hope you don't mean blindly. I'm trying here and attempting to discuss this with you and provide proof. What more do you want me to do? All I ask of you is a little more proof and some civility. OlYeller^Talktome 04:46, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Your only contributions to this page have been deletions which we have since established were done in error, and you have not restored the material you've deleted. Now you've found another site, and deleted more material, and then edit warred with me rather than justify your deletions, and again you were proven wrong. What is your obsession? Is this what you do in your spare time? Copy and paste text from this page into google and if one site comes up, it's copyright infringement? Have you made a single constructive edit to this page, by either adding material or removing it? AzureFury (talk | contribs) 04:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I checked the edits you've pointed out and they were made at 12:46 AM and 12:47 AM on October 4th (you even linked the edit I linked). I'm not going to revert your edit until we discuss this some more as I don't think you're going to let this go but I'd still like to ask that you do. I understand that you want the description here but even by your proof points to the text being taken from the other website. What more is needed to convince you? OlYeller^Talktome 04:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Again, I haven't reverted your edit yet because I'm not trying to edit war with you; I'd rather come to a conclusion here that we can both agree on. I'm going to ignore your suggestion that the only way to contribute to WP is to add material and that deleting material isn't helpful as I don't think it's true or pertinent to this conversation. Please refrain from the personal attacks as well. OlYeller^Talktome 04:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I never said the only way to contribute was to add material. Deletion would be contribution if it wasn't in error. Unfortunately all of your deletions have been in error. But rather than revert them, you've decided to aggressively continue deletion, without learning anything from your mistakes. I see both of those diffs I sent you coming from October 3 at 11:46 PM. There may be a time zone issue here. Regardless, we can see from the diffs the material being constructed. That is enough of a statement of legitimacy. If it was copy and pasted from that website, it would be one diff, not two. It isn't "copyright infringement until proven otherwise" on Wikipedia. Especially when the material in question is on a blog. It was probably the same person adding the material to both pages. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 05:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Whether or not my deletions have been in error is your opinion. The only time I remember reverting you was when you claimed that there was plenty of proof, didn't provide any, and the proof that I find speaks otherwise. The material being constructed here is again, your opinion. As for your copyright infringement until proven otherwise comment, I completely agree but the proof that I have speaks otherwise but by having a civil discussion we find that we may need to dig deeper. Whether or not it's a blog doesn't matter (if some crackpot science teacher comes up with an invention, their copyright claim holds no less water than if GE holds the copyright). I also agree that the same person probably wrote both. Like I said before, this all could have been avoided had you presented proof.

So that it's not a surprise, I've invited people from relevant projects to join the discussion ([7][8][9][10]). Also, I'm going to rewrite the text. I hope that it's an olive branch so that you don't think I'm just here to destroy and it will in my opinion, solve our disagreement over a time stamp. OlYeller^Talktome 05:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

It is not my job to fish through the archives for you. How about you apply some of your passion for copyright infringement search the history as I did? And of course blogs are more likely to copy straight from Wikipedia, they have no editorial insight and they're protected from lawsuits as their content is uploaded by users. If you want to pointlessly reword the text, go right ahead. I won't hold my breath though. And whether or not your deletions are mistakes is not an opinion, it has been demonstrated to be fact, per the Dethhealth example. As I recall you said you would go through and review your edits, but didn't. Much easier to fire and forget deletions isn't it? AzureFury (talk | contribs) 05:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not going to get off topic and discuss the definition of a blog. I'm not going to argue about what you have even admitted is at best a timezone issue. I did go through my edits and found that they were all copyvios with proof. I just wish we could discuss this without you getting so upset about it. I've shown that I can admit when I'm wrong and that I try to come to a solution that we can both agree on. I'd ask what your beef with me is but I don't think it's going to change anything and in this discussion. I'm sorry if I've upset you. I'm not going to continue with this conversation as the copyright issue has been dealt with. If you would like to discuss something else, I'd be happy to do so on my talk page. OlYeller^Talktome 06:16, 12 October 2010 (UTC)