User talk:Metagraph/April 15 - May 15

HeartBreaker
Done, fine. Look, I'm new to this. I'm not an "editor" nor am I trying to make shameless promotions. I realize can do that elsewhere. I loosely followed the format listed in The Iron Maidens article...I know them, we work in the same genre' but we were around long before they were and since we are in the same genre and were the first female-fronted tribute, amongst other things as well as a pioneer in a genre' that is relatively new and has become somewhat of a phenominon (this has been written about and documented in the media), we too have had some small notable recognition. I thought it was relative to the "tribute act" article. Can you please tell me other than the fact that they, the Iron Maidens, have more name dropping in their article what things in particular I can clafiry to make this appear more in line with what all of you seem to be looking for? Sorry about the typos, I've been up too late spending too much time on this and even more now since I seem to be sucked in to trying to save it (and why isn't there a spell check??). But fine, alas if the first thing anyone (perhaps not you) can suggest is deletion, such as Anger22 (and what's up with that name?) instead of helping and not biting the newbie, then, I say just go ahead and delete it. Perhaps it's not worth the time? I do appreciate any help but I'm sure it will take me some time to perfect it, if possible, given the plethora of information I keep getting directed to and particularity if it involves researching information over the past nine years. And, where would one draw the line between self-acquired notability and gained notability? For example, promotions a band has pursued on their own to gain notability, such as making their own record labels, connections such as through friends and acquaintences in local radio stations, newspapers, TV stations and manufacturers? Or, unsolicited gained notability by populairity? Or, is there a difference at all? Thanks--Benatartribute (talk) 07:54, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, I forgot to mention that the name of the band is simply "HeartBreaker" the rest is just clarification. But, I noticed there was alreay an article with the name of "HeartBreaker" regarding some hip-hop single. So, I wasn't sure exactly how to proceed for that reason.--Benatartribute (talk) 07:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Replied on your talk page Matt (talk) 08:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. Thank you for the words of encouragement and any help you can offer, I appreciate it. How and where to I make the comment regarding the changes that have been made since the deletion tag was added? I can change the name of the article, I have no problem with doing that if that is more correct for Wikipedia purposes in this case. It isn't part of the the name we are so attached to but moreover, many, most or all of tribute bands use that "tag" so to speak as a 1) means of identifying that they are a tribute and 2) the obvious emphasis on what type of tribute to that artist they are, i.e., "The Ultimate," "The Premier," "The Essence Of," etc., (which is obviously subjective) 3) to set the band apart from other tributes with the same name. Or as in our case, the revised tag was originated a few years ago to clarify our position in the community since another local "Pat Benatar" tribute formed in the area and people (fans and agents) were getting confused. We had already built a reputation and needed to clarify our position, i.e., that HeartBreaker was the "first" or "the one already here," particularily since in many opinions the other band was not of the same caliber. Prior to that, we were just "HeartBreaker" and "A Tribute to Pat Benatar" was added beneath the logo as a means of identifying information as I mentioned.

Another reason for this tag might be the idea that since many tributes use very similar logos, if not the same logos, as the original artists in a slightly modified version so as to accomodate the name difference and so as to more immediately identify themselves to the viewer as being as close to the original as possible (which is the objective of a tribute), is the issue of "copyright" infringement that might or could possibly come into play? I don't think any tribute wants to imply that they "are" the original act or artist, therefore a tag is used to immediately make that distinction. Much discussion has taken place in the tribute community, particularily in the beginning years of the tribute boom, regarding what reaction the original artist had or would have toward a tribute. There were rumours or incidents of a "Cease and Desist" order made to a particular tribte to The Rolling Stones, which untimately never amounted to anything. The bottom line is however, most tributes will tell you they are not in competition with, or attempting to, make personal gains by overshadowing or attempting to overshadow the original artist but simply, playing to keep the music of that artist alive. The objective is to "re-create" in a live setting that work and personna of the original artist. In many cases, the most popular tributes are those to whom the original artists are no longer performing or those artists most popular with the masses. A tribute band is about paying respect to the original artist, much like any form of tribute. And generally, these days tributes have become more widely accepted, in many ways, not only to the original artists as evidenced by many tributes who have been joined by some member of the original artist's band, such as ourselves, but by booking agents, fans and the media. That, is the phenominon. Over the years we have seen many tributes come and go, yet we are still here. I hope that what I have seen take place in this genre over the years and with HeartBreaker has some significance in history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benatartribute (talk • contribs) 16:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Replied on your talk page Matt (talk) 22:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Matt, I appreciate that. No worries, I saved the information, I knew he would do that it was predictable by his tone. I personally felt Mr. Wind is just a bitter former musician since he had to tell me that he "was in the biz for a decade." Some people are just angry at everybody else, like Mr. Anger 22, and looking for someone to blame. Can I just check my perceptions? Is everyone here editing, just individuals on the internet? Or, are you employees of Wikipedia? Because it seems like there are junk yard dogs running around loose imposing their personal interpretations, which really are just individual opinions. (And you know what they say about that). I replied to his initial delete comment but did not post it last night as it all made me very weary. But, I'm posting it to him now. And, since he really liked my long post the day before he should enjoy this one. Whether or not we're listed here right now doesn't matter as much as that we are who we are, we have as long as it takes. This to me is all a very gray area, that's why I asked about status. He doesn't seem to know anything about tribute bands? Or, at least it didn't come across that way. You "got" it right? And, is it some mysterous person employed by Wikipedia who makes the deletion? Or, whomever wants to? He did, right? Just curious. And, I seem to remember something about explaining why something is relevant. Can you explain this to me? I guess I thought that I had, but perhaps not? And, would it matter? You've been really kind, thank you. (...and by they way, I'm not the quitin' kind...) I'll be back to ask you questions, if you don't mind? Pam--Benatartribute (talk) 07:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, I hope I have the energy to go to the right places with this. May I quote or reference some of your comments? And, should I reference any of the points I have made in my previous comments? And mostly, should I refer to the other bands on the article (or in the category) tribute bands as examples??? Was my article perhaps in the wrong place??? Perhaps it should be in the sub-category tribute bands??? Which I'm also very confused about since there is a category page but when you search "tribute bands" you actually get the "tribute acts" article. And, by the way, the listing there says, "Some well-known tribute bands include..." Well, I've only heard of one or two and I've been in the tribute genre with HB for ten years and regularily perused the internet for other tributes over the years so I think I'm pretty in the know regarding tribute bands. Also, there is much to be written about them than is actually stated therein (and that's a whole new ballgame). So, regarding the sub-category I'm not actually sure if I saw that article/page previously, it's seperate from the tribute acts] article but nevertheless more of the same basic stuff. I have looked through the articles of several of the listed tribute band's and don't really see any, with the exception of The Iron Maidens, who really have much more to offer than HeartBreaker, it's all more of the same type of information. I'm not sure I saw User:C.Fred's comment? Where was it? All these pages are really quite confusing to me at this point and I'm just sort of getting used to them now. I never really inteded to become this drawn in, but, whatever it takes I guess. Also, since it wasn't Mr. Wind who deleted the comment, perhaps I shouldn't even bother with him? Pam--Benatartribute (talk) 08:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Matt - thanks for the barnstar, it's much appreciated! Any particular reason for it (the business on the pavlova talk page, perhaps)? Grutness...wha?  00:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Signing
Hi Metagraph! Please don't forget to sign your comments ( ~ ). Thanks for your vote at the Pokemon Platinum AfD! Cheers, Face 08:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)