User talk:Bringa

Hello, old buddy old pal, welcome to Wikipedia. You might like to start by reading the tutorial and introducing yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask at the help desk or on my talk page. Two useful tips are that you can sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ) and you can preview your changes before you save using the show preview button. You can regularly find new tips on the Community Portal. I look forward to reading your great articles and I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. :) Fennec (&#12399;&#12373;&#12400;&#12367;&#12398;&#12365;&#12388;&#12397;) 01:23, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Post-black metal
I removed the prod tag. Just so you know, though, you can contest a prod by removing the tag and explaining why on the talk page. --Woohookitty(meow) 06:45, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey no problem. :) Yeah, users only have a problem with it if prod tags are removed with no explanation. If you explain it in the edit summary or on the talk page, you shouldn't have a problem. If you do, tell me. :) --Woohookitty(meow) 10:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Undeletion request
Sure, I can make the deleted text (article and talk page) available for you to work on. It will be available at User:Bringa/Post-black metal and User talk:Bringa/Post-black metal in a few minutes. Please note my standard Undeletion warning: ''Note that using the text to recreate the deleted content is speedyable, and using it to keep it hanging around in your userspace has gotten editors penalized before. But that's your problem.'' You can work on this article while it's in your userspace to try and improve the article to address the concerns of the delete voters. If they still deem the content as deletion-worthy, they may get your userfied article deleted. --Deathphoenix ʕ 19:57, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. --Deathphoenix ʕ 20:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * One of the problems is that there is no hard-and-fast rule. Basically, it's too long when someone says it's too long. However, I think your article is safe as long as you make it known that you are still in the process of improving the article (such as by looking for references). You'll be given some leeway, but I wouldn't leave the article to ferment in your userspace for TOO long. --Deathphoenix ʕ 20:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Find some magazine references touting its importance and describing the scene, and you will have an article that resists deletion. Rintrah 05:16, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Concerning the above: I decided not to bother after all. Better ways to spend a lot of time etc ;) --Daniel Klein (talk) 21:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

RE: Deletion of Zero Hour
The article was deleted as a result of a proposed deletion. Please review that policy, and also not the reason it was deleted which was "Group fails WP:MUSIC guidelines". The article can be restored on request, as the proposed deletion policy allows for, however, I'd invite you to work on the issues that caused the article to be deleted, which was a lack of an assertion of notability per the music notability guidelines. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Replying on my talk page is fine. I can restore the article if you wish; just ask :-).  You are more then welcome to work on it at that point. - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've restored the article, as per your request. All I can suggest is that you review WP:MUSIC and ensure that the article meets the guidelines explained there. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Technical Metal
Decided to keep some notes here on why Technical Metal should be an article on WP. First the text I posted in the talk page of the administrator who deleted the article in the first place:


 * among the fans of progressive metal, it is a very clearly understood term, denoting a specific group of bands. If you tell someone who is also knowledgeable in progressive metal that you like technical metal, they would assume that you like Spiral Architect, for instance, but they would not assume that the term includes most other progressive metal bands.
 * there are bands that cannot be put into any other genre. Here's a short list off the top of my head of bands that can be classified as Technical Metal and as nothing else:
 * Spiral Architect
 * Watchtower
 * Spastic Ink
 * Twisted into Form
 * Zero Hour
 * Blotted Science
 * Wikipedia agrees that there is such a thing as Technical Death Metal. Technical Metal is very similar to that genre, only that the brutality of Death Metal is absent. Technical Death Metal, as a name, was formed out of Technical Metal and Death Metal.


 * A number of factors make it difficult to understand that this genre exists for people from outside of the confines of Progressive Metal fandom.
 * It is a very, very small genre. It is by far the most demanding genre for a musician to play in, and many of the performers are actually having medical complications from the strain the genre puts on them (Ron Jarzombek and Troy Tipton are two examples of Technical Metal instrumentalists who had to undergo repeated surgeries to their arms/hands).
 * It is an extreme version of progressive metal, and very often when you go to an extreme along one potential axis (technicality), there is a temptation to go to an extreme along another axis (brutality). Hence there are many more technical death metal bands than technical metal bands.
 * It is not entirely inaccurate to call, for instance, Spiral Architect a progressive metal band. I would compare it to calling Dream Theater a Heavy Metal band. Surely they are that, but if you call DT heavy metal instead of progressive metal you leave out a good chunk of information that tells the audience not to expect something like Manowar or Iron Maiden. Thus with calling Spiral Architect Progressive Metal. It is not inaccurate, but it fails to differentiate them from very different bands such as Symphony X or Shadow Gallery, and the difference between those and Spiral Architect is at least as big as the difference between Manowar and Dream Theater.
 * This niche being as small as it is, you will not find many commercial publications dedicated to it. I am not aware of any print magazine devoted to Progressive Metal, for instance. Thus it will be hard to find any sources dedicated to Technical Metal. That the genre is very small should not get in the way of a Wikipedia article; after all, a WP article exists for Government simulation game under video game genres, and there seem to be fewer government simulation games than technical metal bands.

Next, a number of links:

This page calls it alternatively "Progressive Technical Metal" and "Technical Progressive Metal" and lumps a lot of bands in there that clearly don't belong in the category, like Pain of Salvation or Rage. However, it does have a few bands that are clearly Technical Metal: Spiral Architect, for instance, or Power of Omens.

The bands tagged "Technical Metal" on last.fm include a lot of Technical Death Metal. An argument could be made that the bands I consider Technical Metal are those that do NOT also have the death metal tag. All of my bands appear in that list.

Amazon's Technical Metal tag list has a lot of false positives again, as expected, but if we look at this and the other lists and exclude everything that's missing from one of the lists, we're approaching a very good group of bands. For instance, Zero Hour is on all these lists, while a lot of nonsense appears only on one list.

Foxytunes defines tech metal, whatever the hell foxytunes is. A very stub-like list with not much in it, but the definition isn't half bad.

Wapedia article on tech metal throws a lot of stuff in again. I'd argue that only the thing they call "Progressive Technical Metal" is what I consider Technical Metal.

ProgArchives's list of technical metal bands. Again, lots of false positives since they lob a lot of stuff like technical death and avant-garde metal in the same category, but if we find enough big lists we should be able to show that certain bands show up on all of those lists.

Here's the guy who runs LASERCD calling Zero Hour technical metal. LaserCD is, of course, the number one mailorder for all things progressive metal.

LaserCD catalogue entry for Spiral Architect genre: Technical Metal

LaserCD catalogue entry for Twisted into Form genre: Technical Metal

Similar entries for: Canvas Solaris, Blotted Science, Behold... the Arctopus, and Spastic Ink (in the prose).

Okay, last let's assemble a list of bands that are clearly Technical Metal and nothing else, starting with the list I gave above.


 * Spiral Architect
 * Watchtower
 * Spastic Ink
 * Twisted into Form
 * Zero Hour
 * Blotted Science
 * Liquid Tension Experiment ??
 * Power of Omens
 * Sleep Terror ?? (this one is close to tech death, but since there's no singing an argument could be made it's just tech metal)
 * Behold... the Arctopus -- once more an argument could be made that this is instrumental tech death, but I would call that tech metal.
 * Canvas Solaris
 * Dysrhythmia
 * Anomaly (Netherlands)
 * Scale the Summit

You Made Me Laugh...
...by doing this. Thanks for watching the page. -- Altiris   Helios   Exeunt  11:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I know, but I still like your edit summary. -- Altiris   Helios   Exeunt  12:32, 18 October 2008 (UTC)