Forum Home Forum Home > Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements > Help us improve the site
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Negative comments on bios...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedNegative comments on bios...

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 17 2007 at 22:27
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

 
The bio says "a weak concept album that reached their lowest point with the terrible track "Mr. Robotto".... Now, we can agree with that. But why don't we say "an album widely regarded as their weakest with their most criticized track, Mr Roboto"? Something like that, I guess, doesn't sound like we';re giving our final judgement in a BIO. In a review, I think we should be free to bash whatever we want (with respect of course)... but in a bio?  
 
 
Well T, there are some facts you should know before commenting: 
  1. STYX was here a long time and didn't had a Bio, my bio gives a lot of facts that almost nobody knew and my personal opinion in one album.
  2. This Bio was not added by me, IT WAS APPROVED, CORRECTED AND ADDED BY M@X personally.
  3. The only nergative phrase is: ."This era ends in 1983 with the infamous "Kilroy Was Here" a weak concept album that reached their lowest point with the terrible track "Mr. Robotto" and the Live album "Caught in the Act".....that's a fact.
  4. The word INFAMOUS means: having a reputation of the worst kind, and that's a fact, the reputation of Kilroy was Here, and the song Mr Robotto can't be worst, I'm inventing nothing.
  5. When i say this album is bad, it's for a purpose, so people who listen it, know that there are much better albums and don't stop listening STYX because they found Kilroy Was Here is terrible.
  6. Even the band fans and every Prog site recognize Kilroy was Here is the lowest point ogf their career.
  7. If people hear Kilroy Was Here and hate it, they can assume all STYX is like this and refuse to listen other great albums, I read hundreeds of times people refusing to listen Gabriel Genesis because they heard Invisible Touch, and I don't want this to hapen to STYX.
  8. I am not a machine of giving facts, if you want that,forget bios, make a list of their albums, you can't be more cold than that, but I'm also a person of opinions, and believe me, you will be surprised how many bands have copied my bios for their sites, because the opinion is the human touch.
  9. My bio about the album of Anton Roolaart says his voice is not the best for a Prog album, but his site and his own  label included it, because a bio and a review need the human touch and honesty.
  10. Atb the end, this is my style and it's honest.

If you have any problem with the review, tell M@X who approved and added this bio nobody did in almost two years (In the early days of PA M@X was the only one who added the bands, but you don't know that because you were not a member then).

A biography needs facts and opinions, cold enumeration of facts helps nothing, an opinion is also important.
 
I stand in my opinion.
 
Iván
 
EDIT:
 
Just in case, this is my bio of STYX
 
Quote STYX is one of those bands that are always mentioned with some fear and shame by the progressive fan because they always played in the border that divides progressive rock from plain POP, I believe the best way to describe them is as Prog Related (understanding this description as the simplest and more commercial form of Progressive Rock) blended with AOR, somehow in the same vein as JOURNEY or BOSTON but a bit more complex.

Officially born in 1972 from the ashes of "The TRADEWINS” and “TW4” was formed by the Panozzo twins (Chuck on bass and John on drums), Dennis de Young (vocals and keyboards), James Young (guitar, vocals) and John Curulewski (guitar, vocals).

In the first years they were closer to progressive rock than ever, from 1972 to 1974 the band released four albums, "Styx", "Styx II", "The Serpent is Rising" and "Man of Miracles", even though they were popular in Chicago, still the band couldn’t reach commercial success. As a curiosity, in their first album they recorded "Movement for a Common Man" based in Aaron Copland’s Fanfare for the Common Man, almost five years before ELP. In 1975 they release their more commercially consistent album (at that point of course) "Equinox" which blended Rock & Roll, Pop and Progressive Rock in an efficient way, "Light Up", "Lorelei" and "Suite Madam Blue" are the first songs in which the band achieve some financial success and show the sound they pretended to create.

1976 was a crucial year for "STYX", John Curulewsky leaves the band and is replaced by Tommy Shaw who became the front man with his California boy image (Even when he was born in Montgomery Alabama) and lighter style, the band finally had the face capable of reaching the female public and massive acceptance. "Crystal Ball" was released in the same year with a moderate success, "Crystal Ball", "Mademoiselle" and "Put me On" became favorites in their massive concerts, the band was reaching their commercial peak but started to abandon prog rock and turning into an ARENA band.

At this point the story is well known, "The Grand Illusion" became a platinum album with major hits like "Fooling Yourself" and of course "Come Sail Away", also their three next albums "Pieces of Eight", "Cornerstone" and "Paradise Theater" reached commercial success with tracks that go from light prog’ to soft pop ballads. This era ends in 1983 with the infamous "Kilroy Was Here" a weak concept album that reached their lowest point with the terrible track "Mr. Robotto" and the Live album "Caught in the Act", after that the tragedy hits the band, John Panozzo dies in 1996 and his brother Chuck contracted Aids, after a few albums the band joins again for another successful tour and the release of their album and video "Return to Paradise" featuring the excellent drummer Todd Sucherman.

The story turns more turbulent when Dennis de Young sues the rest of the band and settle in 2001. In the spring of 2003 they release "Cyclorama" with a different formation and only two members (James Young and Tommy Shaw) from the classic lineup.

Iván Melgar Morey, PERU
 
I believe it will get the interest of listeners more than just giving facts and dates, as a fact I believe it speaks well of the band, telling people that everything they did is better than Kilroy Was Here....If I got a dime for each time I read "Hey STYX is crap, just listen Mr Robotto", I would be rich, but this comments harm the the band, because people believe all their music is in the level of this album, and that's not true.
 
Read the forums, many people use Mr Robotto and Babe to attack STYX, and probably they never listened anything else, I'm trying to be honest swaying...Yes KWH is bad, but they have a lot of good music also.


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - October 17 2007 at 23:57
            
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 17 2007 at 22:38
Originally posted by Ghost Rider Ghost Rider wrote:



Which brings me to another important issue... I am afraid many of the bios here need a major overhaul, since they are either too short, too biased, or somewhat incorrect as to the information they contain. However, I also realise this would be a monumental undertaking, and not something to be tackled lightly.
 
We did this on Symphonic Raffaella, Bob, HT and me added more than 200 biographies of bands that didn't had one or had a two lines bio, it was a monumental task, but we managed to do it in less than a month.
 
If you check, Symphonic has at the most two bands without bios out of almost 400 and hardly very short ones, it took a lot of job, but it was rewarding.
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 00:20
If people read my initial post, you can check, as it's the best way to do to find out truths, that I never even mention who wrote that email, as, in fact, I didn't even know and didn't even care. I just heard STYX the night before and I checked the bio to see what was said about "Kilroy was here". I found out something I don't agree with, I create a thread about it, as I said, mostly for FUTURE bios, as it's quite difficult that old ones would be changed.
 
I stand by what I said. For future bios, I suggest to keep them opinion-less, specially if those opinions are negative.
 
I don't care who wrote what. I never attacked nobody. If someone thinks I did it, well, let's apply the cold "reading what the words say and what they leterally MEAN" principle and we'll find my initial idea is about something bigger (or smaller, whatever you want) than just bashing a person's work.
 
Live with what you want.
 
EDIT: Please, let's not turn this into a personal matter...the discussion was going very well and ws quite useful up to this point


Edited by The T - October 18 2007 at 00:26
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65268
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 00:26
I think we all do a phenomenal job.. if someone slips in a complimentary remark or notes a criticism, I think that's fine.. many professional bios include such important things









Edited by Atavachron - October 18 2007 at 00:27
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 00:28
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

I think we all do a phenomenal job.. if someone slips in a complimentary remark or notes a criticism, I think that's fine


 
Of course we do. If we're so easy to give criticism to bands and albums (as ALL of us are), I think we can take opinions about some work that we have done, specially when the author of it was irrelevant for the actual substance of the opinion.
 
This is just for the future.
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65268
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 00:31
don't quite follow that..


Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 00:44
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

If people read my initial post, you can check, as it's the best way to do to find out truths, that I never even mention who wrote that email, as, in fact, I didn't even know and didn't even care. I just heard STYX the night before and I checked the bio to see what was said about "Kilroy was here". I found out something I don't agree with, I create a thread about it, as I said, mostly for FUTURE bios, as it's quite difficult that old ones would be changed.
 
They can be changed, but I believe it would be dishonest, that's my opinion about Kilroy Was Here and specially Mr Roboto, please, even Tommy Shaw  (member of the band and co-author) speaks of this album.
 
Quote Tommy Shaw: Yes. After my third solo album I really wanted to be doing something else. JY and I had gotten friendly enough to the point where he came and sang on one of my songs on the last record. You know, we were warming up. I thought, what the heck, I'm over all the stupidity of the Kilroy fiasco and all of that, so we started warming up.
 
The album was bad, and I believe we must be honest, people come here for information.
 
BTW: What Email?
 
I stand by what I said. For future bios, I suggest to keep them opinion-less, specially if those opinions are negative.
 
I don't agree, bios and reviews must be honest, if you want something exact, cold and without opinions, i suggest this format:
  1. The band was formed in the year ....
  2. Their founders  were.......
    • X member was changed by Y member
    • Z member was changed for A member
  3. This is their discography (without opinions)
  4. Don't compare the band with another one or mention influences, bexcause this can be subjective.
  5. The band split in ......

But people don't come to PA to read that, if they want facts, they can go to Wikipedia or Allmusic, they come here to read opinions, people trust in this site, this review has been here for a couple of years and never anybody said a word about it, maybe is bad (I'm not Shakespeare LOL) but it's honest. 

I don't care who wrote what. I never attacked nobody. If someone thinks I did it, well, let's apply the cold "reading what the words say and what they leterally MEAN" principle and we'll find my initial idea is about something bigger (or smaller, whatever you want) than just bashing a person's work.
 
I didn't say you attacked, I only stand on what i wrote.
 
Live with what you want.
 
Don't get that one.
 
Iván
 
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - October 18 2007 at 00:51
            
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 00:52
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

If people read my initial post, you can check, as it's the best way to do to find out truths, that I never even mention who wrote that email, as, in fact, I didn't even know and didn't even care. I just heard STYX the night before and I checked the bio to see what was said about "Kilroy was here". I found out something I don't agree with, I create a thread about it, as I said, mostly for FUTURE bios, as it's quite difficult that old ones would be changed.
 
They can be changed, but I believe it would be dishonest, that's my opinion about Kilroy Was Here and specially Mr Roboto, please, even Tommty Shaw speraks of this album.
 
BTW: What Email? I was thinking about something else. My mistake. The word should be BIO.
 
Please, read what the members of the band have to say about Kilroy was here:
 
Quote Tommy Shaw: Yes. After my third solo album I really wanted to be doing something else. JY and I had gotten friendly enough to the point where he came and sang on one of my songs on the last record. You know, we were warming up. I thought, what the heck, I'm over all the stupidity of the Kilroy fiasco and all of that, so we started warming up.
 
The album was bad, and I believe we must be honest, people come here for information. I agree. But my point is (and I insist: mostly for FUTURE bios): review are for opinions. If you see the page of each artist, you'll find a list of albums with ratings. They'll see "Kilroy.....2.23" They can dig further and read the reviews... 
 
I stand by what I said. For future bios, I suggest to keep them opinion-less, specially if those opinions are negative.
 
I don't agree, bios and reviews must be honest, if you want something exact, cold and without opinions, i suggest this format:
  1. The band was formed in the year ....
  2. Their founders  were.......
    • X member was changed by Y member
    • Z member was changed for A member
  3. This is their discography (without opinions)
  4. The band split in ......

I actually would agree with that, maybe with a little "heart", but mostly in talking about the good things of a band. I really agree with that format you described.

But people don't come to PA to read that, if they want facts, they can go to Wikipedia or Allmusic, they come here to read opinions, people trust in this site, this review has been here for a couple of years and never anybody said a word about it, maybe is bad (I'm not Shakespeare LOL) but it's honest.  No it's not bad (bio, not review by the way). I just found it after listening to a compilation and I happened to notice something that could be useful to us in the future.

I don't care who wrote what. I never attacked nobody. If someone thinks I did it, well, let's apply the cold "reading what the words say and what they leterally MEAN" principle and we'll find my initial idea is about something bigger (or smaller, whatever you want) than just bashing a person's work.
 
I didn't say you attacked, I only stand on what i wrote. I also do the same. Good though, that you realize that.
 
Live with what you want.
 
Don't get that one. Again, that can be discarded.
 
Iván T
 
 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 01:03
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

I was thinking about something else. My mistake. The word should be BIO.
 
Don't worry 
 
 I agree. But my point is (and I insist: mostly for FUTURE bios): review are for opinions. If you see the page of each artist, you'll find a list of albums with ratings. They'll see "Kilroy.....2.23" They can dig further and read the reviews... 
 
Do you believe Prog Archives is the N° 1 site in the net for the average given to the albums? No T, this site is N° 1 BECAUSE WE GIVE OPINIONS AND INFORM.
 
Do you believe anybody cares if the average of "Kilroy was Here is 2.23??? Please, nopbody cares about that, huindreeds of times has been written that the rating is a visual aid, the important facts and opinions can be found in the bios and reviews.
 
Check how many of our bios are copied and posted in the bands web sites, this is for the opinions, not for cold numbers,
 
, maybe with a little "heart", but mostly in talking about the good things of a band. I really agree with that format you described.

Oh please T, this is not school to give facts and dates, if we make Bios and Reviews with that format, nobody would read us, they can find that info in the Amazon page.
 
People come here for substance, if we only give positive feedback, we are being dishonest, people trust us and we need to tell them our complete and 100% honest opinion. 
 
And why talk only about the good things of the band? leave that to their label and producer, we are here to say our truth, not to make propaganda.
 
As I said before , there are bands that really suck and we had to be diplomatioc to the extreme to make a couple of lines about them without telling people..Hey this is crap....I won't go to that extreme, but I won't say, this album or band is good if it is terrible.
 
  No it's not bad (bio, not review by the way). I just found it after listening to a compilation and I happened to notice something that could be useful to us in the future.
 
I still believe that a good biographer and reviewer must point the high and low points, doing otherwise woyuld be dishonest, I don't have the balls to tell a newbie, "Hey buy Invisible Touch, you will love it" if the guy is asking for a Prog album,. I must tell him, it's not Prog at all, it's only a POP album, if you like POP, buy it, but if you want Prog, run from it.
 
In the same way I must say to a newbie, "Hey you can get The Grand Illusion, but don't get Kilroy was Here, becauise it's a terrible album". 
 
I also do the same. Good though, that you realize that.
 
Then we are Ok
 
 Again, that can be discarded
 
Better, because it blew my brains. LOL
 
Iván
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - October 18 2007 at 01:11
            
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 03:39
I think the point here is not to take this thread  as a criticism of a single biography, but a general discussion on the styling of biographies. Let not get tied up in personalities.
 
Atavachron, no problem at all with discogs in the bio section, but as has been stated, they tend not to get updated after the bio has been added.
 
Anyone can write a biography for a band, and receive credit for it. If the band does not presently have a biography, jsut send the new one on to Hibou for validation and addition. If there is already a biography, it's probably bets to check with a member of the specialist team for the band's genre before submitting.
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20251
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 03:42
OK, I'll restate my point on this.
 
Negative comments on bio about albums generally considered poor by the majority or popular wisdom is not be seen as an opinion, but a fact!!
 
I don't see where saying in the bio that from a ProgArchives that Invisible Touch is less worthy from a prog point of view than The Lamb or even Duke is an opînion, but simply an argument that reflects the site's advice in general. You'll find other sites that will say the opposite.
 
 
 
In Styx's case, I don't think it is a problem either as the whole band reneg the Killroy album anyway and call it a piece of crap, except its sole conceptor Denis DeYoung.
 
As a matter of fact, this "opinion" becomes a precious info for those wanting to spare money!
 
 
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

Anyone can write a biography for a band, and receive credit for it. If the band does not presently have a biography, just send the new one on to Hibou for validation and addition. If there is already a biography, it's probably bets to check with a member of the specialist team for the band's genre before submitting.
 
Is Lise still active?? (haven't heard from her in agesBroken%20Heart
 
and must we send her our propsed bios for her approval???


Edited by Sean Trane - October 18 2007 at 03:45
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 03:55

I think we're barking up the same tree Hugues. It is perhaps a question of how you say it, rather than what you say. If you say "The general view of fans is..." That is different to simply saying "XXX album is their worst", which sounds like a personal opinion.

Yes, Hibou is still active behind the scenes. Those SCs who have direct access to the bios can of course still update them.
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20251
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 09:18
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

I think we're barking up the same tree Hugues. It is perhaps a question of how you say it, rather than what you say. If you say "The general view of fans is..." That is different to simply saying "XXX album is their worst", which sounds like a personal opinion. >>>> ClapClapClapClapClap

Yes, Hibou is still active behind the scenes. Those SCs who have direct access to the bios can of course still update them.>>> Goodie!! I'll drop her a pm somedayHugStarHeartYing%20YangHug
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 12:51
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

I think we're barking up the same tree Hugues. It is perhaps a question of how you say it, rather than what you say. If you say "The general view of fans is..." That is different to simply saying "XXX album is their worst", which sounds like a personal opinion.

 
Hi Bob, I understand you, but please understand me, everyboddy klnows that despite the general dislike in this Forum for STYX, I'm a fan and always find myself defending them, so there's no hatred or bad intentions towards the band, by the contrary.
 
But I read and heard phrases similiar to this one hundreeds of times:
 
"STYX shouldn't be here, just listen the crap they released as Babe and Mr Roboto"
 
And this doesn't happen only with STYX, also with Kansas, people criticize them because "Dust in the Wind", a member has called them Redneck Prog and Pork Burger.
 
So if you know where the hate against this bands goes, the best thing to do is to tell people, "Yes, Kilroy Was Here is a terrible album, but  Crystal Ball and The Grand Illusion are outstanding, maybe not totally Prog, but both are great albums"
 
This is the general idea about STYX:
 
Originally posted by Witchwoodhermit Witchwoodhermit wrote:

I remember being in junior high when Styx surfaced. Anyone caught listening to "that" were beaten to the ground-or at least ridiculed.
I stay away from Styx.
 
So if I talk the truth (Please, it's accepted by the own members of STYX except Dennis de Young) people will learn, that they didn't listened the best album and that the general sound of STYX is far better than  the infamous album, so they will give a chance to The Grand Illusion or STYX with CYO DVD..
 
The more people that buy Kinroy was Here or listen Babe, the less people that will have interest in listening STYX, so better avoid this album and give a chance to the rest.
 
People in Perú hate STYX because they heard only Mr Roboto and Babe (outr radios played both songs ad nauseam), so in a Peruvian Forum in which I'm moderator, I'm also in charge of the album of the week (Since may I believe) and there  I added The Grand illusion .
 
The response was incredible, people couldn't believe this was the same band that released Kilroy Was here, now they are buying this album.
 
That's my opinion, it's better top tell the wiode known truth that to tell people that this album has something good, becauise most of thepeople who listemn it, won't go for the older stuff.
 
Iván
            
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 15:50
Ivan, I think we all agree on that. What we're saying though is that such comments should not simply be put as a personal opinion, but phrased in such a way that it is established opinion. The case you make here makes that clear, but perhaps the phrasing in the biography does not.
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 18 2007 at 21:47
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

Ivan, I think we all agree on that. What we're saying though is that such comments should not simply be put as a personal opinion, but phrased in such a way that it is established opinion. The case you make here makes that clear, but perhaps the phrasing in the biography does not.
 
Well, to avoid suceptibilities, I changed the phrase for:
 
This era ends in 1983 with the infamous "Kilroy Was Here" a weak concept album,  which according to critics and fans reached their lowest musical point with the ultra commercial, repetitive and way bellow their standards track "Mr. Roboto".
 
I won't change the word infamous because according to the dictionary it means "Having a reputation of the worst kind", and that's a fact.
 
So now it's clear that the opinion about Kilroy and Mr Roboto comes from the critics and fans.
 
Hope it's clear now.
 
Iván


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - October 18 2007 at 21:48
            
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 19 2007 at 03:31
Ideal Ivan.Thumbs%20Up A good example for others.
 
Back to Top
Angelo View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13244
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 19 2007 at 03:51
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

what's wrong with having discographies at the bottom of bios?  It's an easy, quick way of getting information without having to scroll all the way down.. and are often a more complete list than the actual albums added which is frequently incomplete just by the nature of how much music there is out there


Not really - once a new album comes out, it is added to the site, but never to the list at the end of the discography. Redundancy and mismatches go hand in hand after a while.
Besides that, there's a slow but steady discography completion project on the roll.

EDIT: but after reading this thread start-to-end, I guess this point was made already Wink


Edited by Angelo - October 19 2007 at 04:01
ISKC Rock Radio
I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected]
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.