Jump to content

Talk:Antestor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleAntestor was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 21, 2008Good article nomineeListed
July 10, 2021Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Untitled

[edit]

The statement that Antestor is one of only two Christian Metal groups on a secular label is incorrect. I know of at least one other group, Mehida, which fits that description. They are on Napalm Records, which is a secular label. I wanted to note this before making any changes, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.126.163.20 (talk) 06:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No it is not incorrect. The statement says "..the only two Christian black metal groups on a secular label..". Mehida is not a black metal band, and Napalm Records is not a black metal label like Cacophonous is. Thus, Antestor and Horde remain their status' as Christian black metal bands that have had a record deal with a secular label. --Azure Shrieker (talk) 11:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Azure Shrieker is right. Mehida is definitely not black metal. I don't know about the complete validity of the statment, though. There are black metal bands such as Vaakevandring and Drottnar that are considered Christian Metal(by some - many) and are on secular labels. They might not be on a label devoted to black metal, but it would still be considered secular. It's pretty accurate, though. Chrieraux (talk) 20:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the source of that statement is pretty dated, written in 2001. Since years have passed, surely there must be some Christian black metal band on a secular label currently? Vaakevandring and Drottnar are definitely Christian bands, but I think Endtime Productions is a "Christian label." Open Grave Records is a secular label, albeit run by a Christian, but Frost Like Ashes and some other groups are signed to its imprint, Sullen Records. Yup, I'll probably change that statement.--Azure Shrieker (talk) 20:49, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see the statement now reads "in the 1990s, Antestor..." But Indonesian band Kekal released their first album on a secular label in 1998. While their status as a Christian band is debated, at the time they were considered a Christian band. So maybe the statement should be changed to "early to mid 1990s"? 3family6 16:25, 11 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3family6 (talk • contribs)
 Done. Thanks for the suggestion. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 23:46, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GAN on hold

[edit]
  • Have a look at the prose in the lead...it doesn't read well when every sentence starts with "Antestor..."
  • 1st and 2nd paragraphs of first section would probably work better merged...
  • In fact, work on short paragraphs throughout
  • "Arctic Serenades Records was originally sopposed to release that album but, because of some problems, another label, Morphine Records, only pressed 50 bootleg copies of that album." - 1) What were the problems? 2) It sounds awkward jumping to them pressing 50 copies...would read better to say that Morphine took the job of releasing
  • Dates throughout need wlinking per MOS:SYL
  • "The promo-CD caught the interest of British Cacophonous Records, one of the biggest labels with experience in the black metal style." - needs ref
  • The style section is pretty much unsourced....no critical analysis of their music?
  • "Most of all, the group has always been a cult favorite of a small audience rather than a mainstream success." - most of all doesn't sound good...maybe "Generally" (and it'd need some sort of source)
  • "As for critical reception," - this statement isn't necessary...

Mostly looks good...leave me a note when done. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 11:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Small question

What makes any of those reliable sources? Make the discography section like Blur (band), which is pretty much standard for band articles (this section is supposed to be a brief overview, the other info is in the prose anyway). indopug (talk) 21:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Completed the tasks. Those sources are pretty much as reliable as possible for such an underground subject as this. I tried to make sure to cite review sites an other places that are acclaimed at least in the metal scene. And there are even some newspaper sources with wiki articles.--Azure Shrieker (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All looks good here; passing. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 07:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This GAN has passed, and this is now a good article! If you found this review helpful, please consider helping out a fellow editor by reviewing another good article nomination. Help and advice on how to do so is available at Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles, and you can ask for the help of a GAN mentor, if you wish.

Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 07:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

grammar

[edit]

On September 16, not in. Corrections needed throughout. Tony (talk) 06:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for pointing that out. I did correct one instance of grammar just a little bit ago. More will hopefully come soon. BTC 18:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

all the references to the Christian Underground Zine no longer exists. Any solutions? Nor-bm (talk) 17:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess we could convert the TCU references to cite magazine template instead of cite web... Too bad they could not save the page for internet archive... It sure was a great interview.--Azure Shrieker (talk) 18:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I must admit I didn't understand very much :P I trust that you fix it.Nor-bm (talk) 10:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I just noticed you are new to Wikipedia. I'ts difficult to explain, so I'll just fix it. --Azure Shrieker (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm most thankfull :) Yeah, I'm new to Wikipedia though I know the basics from WoWWiki. Thanks for the nice welcome!Nor-bm (talk) 19:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it's fixed now. And yeah, welcome to Wikipedia! This is probably a bit more complicated place than WoWWiki, but you will learn =)--Azure Shrieker (talk) 21:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Antestor symphonic black metal?

[edit]

I've seen that some have added the "symphonic black metal" genre to Antestor. In my opinion, this is wrong. For me, symphonic black metal corporates kinda "orchestral" music, and often instrumentals featuring pieces played by an orchester. Symphonic bm should also has this kind of epic feel.

Newer Dimmu Borgir could be an example of an symphonic bm band. Nightwish' Once could be an example of symphonic metal.

But what I really wanted with this new section, was to start a (yet another) genre debate. Is Anestor really symphonic black metal? What do you consider to be symphonic black metal?

Say your opinions!

Nor-bm (talk) 15:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Antestor is symphonic black metal, or particularly epic or even that synth-based. They could be called progressive black metal but such genre does not exist in Wikipedia. Antestor is more doomy and atmospheric in sound than orchestral. I always thought that a band like Emperor are more like symphonic black metal, but I could be wrong. I'll talk to the person who keeps changing these genres all the time. EDIT: Seems the guy has left his account recently... --Azure Shrieker (talk) 17:33, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree that Antestor isn't really symphonic black metal either. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 02:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed self-published sources

[edit]

I have just removed several self-published sources from the article as they violate WP:BLPSPS and WP:SPS. The log of this removal can be found here. If someone can help in improving this page to keep its GA status, it would be helpful.--3family6 (talk) 00:33, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correct the top text and "members"-box

[edit]

The top text and the "members"-box needs to be edited. Robert Bordevik is no longer in the band, Thor Georg Buer plays guitar, and Erik Normann Aanonsen plays bass. Check the Facebook-page for confirmation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thoveler (talk • contribs) 06:47, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ole Borud

[edit]

Why is Ole Børud listed as a member? Is there a reliable source confirming this?--¿3family6 contribs 19:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's likely another MW addition. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:08, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He was added well-before Metalworker showed up. The current member list goes back to 2012, when User:Djhé did some work on the list, which was subsequently modified by an IP editor. At some point after that, Antestor themselves shared the article on Facebook, mentioning that it was updated. So the band hasn't noted any inaccuracies, at least as the article stood in late 2012.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:29, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Antestor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:55, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Antestor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:13, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Antestor/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This GA article has substantial unsourced content despite being covered by BLP. That's why I've brought it to GA reassessment. (t · c) buidhe 06:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder that this is still open Aircorn (talk) 07:26, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Antestor&oldid=1256864601"