Pink Floyd's biography in Progarchives?!

Snow Dog wrote: sohraab wrote: Easy Livin wrote: In the interests of harmony, I've taken the liberty of amending the thread title. Hope you're OK with that Sohraab.   Dick makes a good point above. Also, there were a large number of bands who were added in short time when the site was created. Inevitably, things would be kept brief then or the site would never have got off the ground. This is though an ever developing place, nothing is cast in stone (except biographies by a couple of our SCs) it`s ok Bob! i can accept everything when someone treats in a good manner... and i hope your `couple of SCs` try to have a revision on their behavior. at least regarding their age and expected social experience. i accept anything that u say. take a look at my `Camel` topic also. i`ll be glad to have ur opinion! I'll tell you what, you're a cheeky bugger and I'm certainly not warming to you. Don't understand why Admin is leaping to defend you all the time.

u`d better look at ur age, and then look at ur behavior and the way that u talk, then hopfully u`ll be a little ashamed. this is the last time that i answer ur post. just don`t find any logic reason to argue with a person like u.

Listen.  I'm a pretty easygoing individual.  Stop being pedantic and condescending, stop the rambling condemnations and haughty dismissals, and for GODS SAKE STOP CAPITALIZING/YELLING AT US, and maybe we can start over on friendly terms.  Capiche?

Easy Money wrote: Post hidden, no name calling please.

Edited by Snow Dog - October 11 2010 at 13:02

Catcher10 wrote: Why can't the Admins just let Sohraab make his PF bio submission changes/edit.......Let the person responsible for that area of the site approve or disapprove the edits?   I guess me personally this is a music site not a specific genre/band site......Bios IMO should be "generic" and not become personal BIOS to show ones "love" for a band.........I don't want to read that. Because the same could be said for the bands here that have a general dislike and or ones that folks feel should not even be here in the PA.....it works both ways and I don't think the PA Powers That Be want that type of a bio.   I think that is what Sohraab was initially saying in his post. He wants more substance to the PF bio but I think that substance would be in the form of what some call "fanboyism". Let him submit it and the checks and balances system will probably not allow it.

my friend,
first of all i love prog music generally and PF is just a particular one. i said many times that they r not my idol. second i know this is not a fan site unless the name of site would have been PF archives or kind of it! third i`m working on Bio to make a concise one and i know very well about checks and balances which r u talking about... i will provide something quite acceptable. and finally i should mention for you that there are many cases on PA which the Bios reflect the love of the writer for the introduced band. wanna some examples? i can provide... so if u consider it as a flaw, mine will not be the only one. although my Bio will not be a `LOVELY` one but a justified one.
keep smiling.

This is beginning to make the Waters/Gilmour fallout look like a sponsored love in

Having said that, even they have kissed and made up.

The collaborators and admins here take the site very seriously.   They take the entries here very serviously, and have been working on updating many aspects of the site.  But if the Pink Floyd bio is in need of reworking, I doubt that it is one of the more pressing issues on their plate.  But if you have a better one, I'm sure they would consider amending the page.

Edited by Knife - October 11 2010 at 19:37

Hi,

Textbook wrote: You can say you hate me Snow Dog.

The topic is the Pink Floyd bio on PA, post your constructive comments or leave this thread alone.

Thank you so much for your patience on this Sohrab, please don't let a few people on this site ruin your enjoyment, most of us are polite and civil as you will find out if you stick around.