Talk:Tommy Shaw

VANDALISM here & at related STYX pages
A small, select few Dennis DeYoung and/or Styx fans are trashing Tommy Shaw, James Young & Styx pages. Please confine your remarks to those which address the article itself and that can be cited using a neutral POV and please don't trash the Tommy Shaw or JY pages nor trash Tommy & JY on the Styx or DDY pages or they will probably all be nominated for indefinite locking, including the DDY page if the trash spills over there, which nobody who really cares about DDY, JY, Tommy or Styx want. It appears to be nothing more than a couple of young, anonymous individuals who have self-esteem issues that are intent on imposing their will and interjecting their uncited, POV remarks so the world will know how they feel, which is sad, but not amusing nor relevant to the articles.--Bamadude 22:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The lock is on now, so the anonymous IP vandal will be blocked for a while. I'll reapply it to lock it again permanently if the user comes back for more.--Bamadude 19:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

This, by the guy who cries "All Dennis Deyoung fans are little girls" on the Styx page. This opinionated jerk is the one currently editing all of the styx related pages with his creepy obsession of Tommy Shaw. He has switched his "identity" on wikipedia many times (remember Marvtixx anyone?). Please do not let him keep spinning these pages to make his obsession, Tommy Shaw, look like the guy who is responsible for all of Styx's triumphs (you know, like She Cares, Cold War, and the current incarnation playing 20 minute set-ups for foreigner and Def Leppard). He is constantly "editing" discussion pages to make it look like he always gets the last word. Don't let him continue. He is a longtime vandal of these pages. --66.32.27.118 17:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * This anonymous user who declines to sign in, reveal itself and stand behind its words has failed to provide any solid edits with cited sources, preferring instead to bash Tommy Shaw & JY over their alleged hijacking of the Styx name. I've called upon this user to provide for everyone exactly what info it wants to insert and provide verified sources for it and the user declined again, preferring to bloviate its opinions and sorrows about DDY no longer being in Styx and how they now suck because of it.  That doesn't constitute a solid contribution to an article.  This user also uses mulitple IP addresses to make people think that a cabal of people is backing up their claims, but they state NO FACTS & HAVE NO SOURCES for their edits, only opinions.--Bamadude 02:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

As I said before, Marv - I am done with giving you something to do for awhile. You'll let this die after a bit (remember that "career and life" you have? I love, though, how you think I am using a slew of IP addresses (I'm pretty sure I don't have THAT many service providers!) to mask the fact that (gosh!) more than just one person might care that you spin the facts and have taken it upon yourself to be the keeper of the gate of SRP wiki articles. Go ahead and write all wiki articles as Tommy fansites. I think its probably transparent to most people out there. But I am done. You should keep making these announcements about me on talk pages. They don't make you look pathetic at all. When all is said and done, feel good about yourself that you have spent the last 2 weeks of your life getting real angry and arguing all day with an identity-less person about a band that, for all intensive purposes, ended 14 years ago. Yes, you DO have a life! Hmmmm, I'll bet you undo this.... --66.32.110.184 02:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

This "dude" is like the Tommy Shaw personal edit security guard, and has no clue what it menans to be objective. All this craziness about editing out the word "version", when Tommy Shaw himself refers to the Styx incarnations as "versions". (Source: Melodicrock.com) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)


 * "Quitcherbitchin" and cite the facts, plain and simple. If you want to edit an article on Wikipedia, cite the facts; the rest is garbage you or some other person created that has nothing to do with reality.  If you REALLY believed in what you're saying, you'd sign in and stand behind it like I do.--Bamadude 01:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

A "version" of Styx addressed
Tommy Shaw & J.Y. do not lead a "version" of Styx as this implies a opinionated, negative connotation that there is more than 1 version of Styx or that the band led by Tommy & JY is not the official Styx band, when in fact there is only 1 band/lineup named Styx and there has only ever been 1. This lineup doesn't include Dennis DeYoung (thankfully, but that's my opinion), but it IS the official group named Styx and DDY was paid well for that right after his termination or mutual parting, however you wish to see it, and the group is as legitimate as a group led only by DDY & JY, if one existed. If you doubt that, a parallel viewpoint would be that the 1975 & onward "version" of Styx that included Shaw, DDY, JY and the Panozzo brothers was simply a "version" after the 1975 Equinox album as it didn't include all the original members when Shaw joined, which is ridiculous. Furthermore, DDY has only been legally granted the right to use the wording "formerly of Styx" in his billing; he doesn't lead a "version" of anything except his own showy act, prefering to work solo and use orchestral reworkings of Styx songs in his show. If you consider the heyday of the group, Styx has 2 "main" members from that time period of their greatest popularity. There are many groups who have members who were not the founding members, but are considered the "main" members in the group's history and are a legitimate band --- Pink Floyd without Syd Barrett and later even without Roger Waters comes to mind; Chicago is another, Genesis after Peter Gebriel and Yes on the 90125 album could be added to that argument. To say that the current lineup of Styx is not legitimate because DDY isn't there is strictly POV, not a fact that belongs in the article.--Bamadude 06:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Revamping
This article had many tangential discussions noting news & achievements by other members of Styx which were done simply to portray the subject of the article in a negative light for no justifiable reason other than to trash Shaw, while a few were legitimate statements which belongs in the Styx article, not here. These diversions had nothing to do with the subject of the article and were removed to make the article more concise, encyclopedic & non-POV. This is an article about Tommy Shaw period, and any statements made should be those which are directly attached to the subject and should be factual, non-fanisms and certainly not "attack" statements by detractors. To state something to the effect of "Shaw had a hit, but DeYoung had a bigger hit" is not appropriate. The entire focus of the article should be on the subject himself and should only state his achievements & actions; anything outside of that should be stated only if necessary to progress the article forward while focused on the subject. This is Journalism 102, a little beyond the basics, but focus and non-POV statements and imperative in all Wikipedia articles to maintain any semblance of credibility.66.191.157.181 22:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Note
There needs to be serious revisions to aspects of this entry. This is more of a fan cite than an informative article. The "Tommy and his Fans" area should be taken out or the Point Of View stuff removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98percenthuman (talk • contribs) 19:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * There were serious revisions needed to this article and they have been addressed and revised. This was more of a fan cite prior to the revisions. Marvtixx 06:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Major Editing Performed - Article Looks Good Now
User Aguerriero removed a section titled "Tommy and his fans" since it was not written in an encyclopedic tone, and it was completely unsourced. -- Aguerriero  ( talk ) 04:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Prior to August 30, 2006, at least 8 major points in the article were erroneous and libelous including outdated links, unsubstantiated rumors, and totally opinionated negative remarks about the subject, tons of anti-fan material, as though some apparent Dennis DeYoung fans had taken over the page. Since that date, a lot of revisions have been made with the help of an informed user and an editor listed below and the article looks really good now. 66.168.246.88 17:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't see anything constructive in the removal of bonafide, factual material from verifiable sources and the removal of unverifiable material, which is all I did and which is what this article sorely needed. Please don't remove the verified, footnoted material unless you have a legitimate reason for doing so, and if you want to leave old unverified info, back up the claims made with official and/or factual sources, which you cannot do as they are not factual nor official. The article had been suffering from fanisms and even somewhat libelous material on the previous edit, not mine.Marvtixx 17:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Revised the article further using cited sources and added a citation needed, plus with all the new material added, the timeline had gotten out-of-whack, so I straightened that out. It's nice to see that the cited material has remained and the article looks very good, professional & well-cited now without any fan-isms or negative, unsourced material. 66.168.246.88 17:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I removed the paragraph which followed the References. Language like "When the multitude of circumstances availed themselves for him to recapture such, he embraced it and has made a personal commitment" isn't just inapproriate for an encyclopedia; it's bad writing for any format. Besides, it doesn't contain any necessary information. It looks like it came straight from the PR department. 63.25.108.98 20:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Tour Dates
Adding tour dates into the text of the article is a recipe for incorporating dated material. A link to StyxWorld.com would be better as it incorporates that info already and it doesn't require constant maintenance.--Bamadude 15:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think, given the constancy with which this page is monitored, that out-of-date material will be an issue. In my opinion, the addition of a few specific venues, with reputable sourcing, may help to prevent the insertion of unsourced, NPOV violations regarding the nature of the current tour. Moonriddengirl 15:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You certainly have a point there.--Bamadude 19:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Damn Yankees
The second album titled Don’t Tread was released. In the article is states it was not. Of that were true, I would not have it. This needs to be corrected. 2600:1702:3E30:7630:E105:36C9:A1FE:5384 (talk) 08:14, 6 November 2023 (UTC)