Talk:Nightmare (Avenged Sevenfold album)

Clean up tags[edit]

The website DeathbatNews is a fansite which fails WP:RS. Any bit of information referenced from this site needs to have a new source. Also, phrases like "they spilled some details" and "the guys have been in town" are not very encyclopedic and need to be rewritten. Fezmar9 (talk) 21:26, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So what you say is that Deathbat News is not such a reliable source and we have to find the info from some other sources? Metal Hammer and Blabbermouth.net are the other sources involved by now, can we rely on these sources?

P.S.: Sorry about the template, it was accidentally. Sirius 128 (talk) 22:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article was kind of prematurely created as very few sources directly reference an album titled "Nightmare" by Avenged Sevenfold. Most only talk about an upcoming album. But by the time an AFD gets opened I am sure there will be an abundance of sources, so why bother with trying to delete it? As of right now the fan site is the only source of this information. But as new sources become available, they should replace DeathbatNews and the template may be removed. Blabbermouth and MetalHammer are perfectly acceptable sources. And no worries about removing the template. Fezmar9 (talk) 22:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive quotations[edit]

What can we do to solve this inconvenient? Should we reduce this section by deleting the information of the interviews? Sirius 128 (talk) 00:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right now the article reads like this: statement, quote, statement, blockquote. If you ran into me on the street, could explain to me, in your own words, the writing and recording history of Nightmare without using quotes? Try to stick to the facts as much as possible, and only include important quotes when necessary. Usually, these would be quotes that would be hard to paraphrase into your own words. Try to avoid phrasing things like "John Doe said the band started writing an album in 1998" and more like "The band started writing in 1998." Does that make sense? Fezmar9 (talk) 01:22, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it still contains too many quotations? Sirius 128 (talk) 00:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's much better than where it was a month ago. I'll take the tag down now! Fezmar9 (talk) 16:28, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Release date[edit]

It has been confirmed by Warner Bros. Media that the release date has been set for July 17, 2010. Though speculations have arisen of a July 27 release date, the record will in fact be released on the 17th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.178.188.31 (talk) 06:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, according to the front page of warnerbrosrecords.com, the album will be released on July 27 as previously announced. Fezmar9 (talk) 13:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually 26th 86.155.162.131 (talk) 18:27, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

Lately I've noticed vandalism coming from anonymous users. Can we semi-protect the article? Sirius 128 (talk) 03:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection is handled via editor requests at WP:RFPP. The admin reviewing the article to determine if the page should be protected or not, and the duration, will take a quick peak at the editing history. Make it so that the vandalism is obvious by undoing edits and filling out the edit summary with something as simple as "vandalism." You should go into more detail in situations where the vandalism is not obvious to other editors. Also, the vandalous edits will need to be recent, or occurring within the last day or so from requesting protection. Based on the current state of the edit history, you may only be granted about 24 hours of protection. Fezmar9 (talk) 07:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed tracks[edit]

The songs "God Hates Us" and "So Far Away" from what I've seen are not confirmed anywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.220.10.94 (talk) 21:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed in this article of Metal Hammer posted by Deathbat News:

http://img199.imageshack.us/i/pg6.png/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.45.52.94 (talk) 22:44, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it is confirmed, but we cannot source Imageshack since it's not a reliable source. It would be best to find a source that will still be available in the future; so, for now, we should wait. Sirius 128 (talk) 01:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One of the editors that kept adding those songs seems to have this magazine article. I requested from him that he provide a proper citation, and gave him instruction on how to do so. Hopefully he will be able to provide this source for us :) Fezmar9 (talk) 02:04, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final cover[edit]

We all know that the band have been posting each day a piece of the cover at their official website. But, when the cover is finished up, do you think we could site their official website to show since when they've been uploading the pieces? Something like this: "In May 27, 2010, the band uploaded a puzzle of their album cover. Each day, they uploaded a new piece of the cover. The artwork was fully revealed on June 15, 2010." --Sirius 128 (talk) 21:25, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the band has been slowly revealing the cover art in puzzle pieces is pretty interesting and very unique, and should definitely be added to the article somewhere. While the official website could be used as a source in this case, the problem is that it will only be a temporary source. Longevity should be taken into consideration when selecting sources, and official band websites are re-created updated almost annually. Once the site is updated, then the information will be lost. It would be best to find a third-party published source now, than have to dig for one in the future. Fezmar9 (talk) 23:14, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Travis Smith (musician) is linked for the cover art when it should be Travis Smith (artist). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.212.40 (talk) 00:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genre[edit]

Since no one has listened to the record yet how is it assumed it's heavy metal and hard rock? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.22.149.234 (talk) 16:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, we should wait until there's an official confirmation. 94.4.161.178 (talk) 00:10, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know that the only song we have heard of Nightmare is the eponymous song and we cannot judge the entire album by a song. For adding a genre, we should use a reliable source when professional reviews of the album show up. Until then, I think we could use the ones provided by now (heavy metal and hard rock) as they are the most expected for an Avenged Sevenfold album. --Sirius 128 (talk) 01:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reading the review by James Zahn, it would indicate that the genre of the album is heavy metal, so it would seem the genre is staying as it is. ChrizC (talk) 22:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added to the genres, I've actually listened to the album already. However I still cited my sources. They're not considered an Rock band, most people consider them "Hard Rock". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.181.49.205 (talk) 21:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is it Melodic Metalcore? Someone please change it, the only melodic metalcore song is God Hates Us, and I dont think we insert genres just because one song suits it. For example, the S/T will not have a genre called "country rock" because Dear God is on it. 24.141.7.98 (talk) 14:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to AllMusic the genre for the record includes Heavy metal, alternative metal, post-hardcore, alternative rock and emo whereas Ultimate Guitar has Heavy metal, alternative metal and hard rock. The perfect conclusion is Heavy metal, alternative metal and hard rock. Post-Hardcore is optional. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevon100 (talk • contribs) 17:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links[edit]

Why do you keep deleting the external links? What is the matter with them? Sirius 128 (talk) 03:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed "alternative metal" to metalcore because the song God Hates Us is metalcore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devil to the metal666 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Album length[edit]

From where do you know the length of the album? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.186.124.175 (talk) 12:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where the editor that specifically added the track lengths got them from, but they can be seen on amazon.com as of today. Fezmar9 (talk) 14:33, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fiction[edit]

The CD booklet says that the piano part is played by a session recorder. It is not played by the Rev. Please change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MetMegFan (talk • contribs) 20:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reception[edit]

The reception section seems to be incredibly unorganized, as quotations from multiple reviews are in it, and not all of them are well-written. So obviously the section needs to be smaller.Brandpanz (talk) 04:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And only positive reviews (some from unreliable sources) are included. There's several here that are negative from the top review publications, not even mentioned. kiac. (talk-contrib) 10:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The L.A. Times review is highly inconclusive . It should not be mentioned for it is clearly that the reviewer did not take the album seriously . As a proof I have 9 pages full of comments that bashed it as being handled in a highly unprofessional manner here. Please , if you ever want to include negative reviews too , make sure they are serious at least . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.122.217.14 (talk) 16:09, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the other review ratings? There should be more...also, all the ratings given are either mediocre or decent, Nightmare got very good ratings, none shown here. 24.141.7.98 (talk) 19:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not question the reviews whether the music critics took the album seriously in your opinion or not!

Unreliable sources including Kick-Axe etc. should not be warranted, the album has received its share of praise and criticism, what the fans think do not count in this field. The fact that the album has been accepted by fans has been placed in the article. Please do not remove reviews, change or add unreliable sources. This is considered as vandalism. Kevon100 (talk) 20:15, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Metalcore??[edit]

Wondering, should Metalcore be a genre because of God Hates Us? Or does one song not count? 94.5.164.124 (talk) 00:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesnt count; Dear God on the self-titled is country rock, and therefore the album's genre isn't considered country rock. 24.141.7.98 (talk) 04:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fiction New Page?[edit]

Fiction has enough information on it to have it's own page, even if it's a stub. It has the most backstory and information of any song off of the album, even Nightare (song). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.108.12 (talk) 20:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC) it should inclued the metalcore of God Hates Us into the genre of the album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OPENLIGHET (talk • contribs) 04:33, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

odd number of quotation marks[edit]

Leonard Pierce of The A.V. Club gave the album a mixed review ending with "Nightmare" is already rocketing up the charts, so it’s unlikely the band’s fans will care, but Avenged Sevenfold continues to sound like five different bands on every album"

this line has 3 quotation marks in it, which makes no sense, where does the quote start (nightmare?)

-speaker — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.54.182.194 (talk) 18:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

5th Album[edit]

Isn't Diamonds in the Rough the fifth studio album because it was released before Nightmare and on that page it states that it is indeed the 5th album so wouldn't that make Nightmare the 6th studio album.

Page Protection[edit]

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) 19:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nightmare (Avenged Sevenfold album). 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 18:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]