Does it piss anybody else off when people make stupid wikipedia edits?

[Madman Shepherd]

I was looking at the timeline today which is a pretty cool visual to show who was in the band at various times.  Somebody a few days ago messed around with it, and apparently wanted to represent the Nightmare Cinema period, so they changed the designated instruments to reflect that.  The problem is, it shows Mike Portnoy being the bassist for Dream Theater from about January 1st 1998 to June 30th 1998.  Same goes for John Myung as the keyboardist for that same period and Derek as guitarist, etc.

Also, the person decided to add the two Johns and Mike as vocalists during the Majesty period.  As far as I know, none of them did vocals into slightly before Falling Into Infinity and JM obviously has never done vocals. 

I was going to go edit it, but there are so many changes itss a pain in the ass and you can't simply undo it.

I was perusing through all of the edits and there is a battle between several posters whether DT should be categorized as "Progressive Rock" or "Progressive Metal"

Who has time for that crap?  One would change it and then a few hours later someone would change it back. 

[Kotowboy]

I've made legit edits to my fave bands and even included links to their official page to prove it and it've tried to write it in the same style...

...sometimes they keep exactly what I wrote and re-word it and keep the link...sometimes they delete it entirely even though it's 100% genuine.

[Progmetty]

You know who has their Wikipedia page locked so it WOULDN'T get edited with stupid edits?
Hitler.
Fact.

[IDontNotDoThings]

I was going to go edit it, but there are so many changes itss a pain in the ass and you can't simply undo it.

[Stadler]

I use Wikipedia a lot - I'm not doing peer-reviewed academic research, here, so a quick set of facts is a good thing to springboard into more research if the subject warrants - so you get a feel for things after a while.   I don't mind "stupid edits" (though it is annoying when I know more than the wiki page; to date I haven't edited one), but what bugs me is badly written text, and, worse, when something reads like a press release with a bunch of subjective things. 

I can't remember the band, but it was a Mickey Ratt or Shark Island or someone like that, 18 minutes of fame if you count being known on Sunset Strip as "fame", and the text was written like it was a segue into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame - stuff like "and so Fred Frick went into the studio with legendary singer Sam Speedo in tow, the result being the finely crafted and now-immortal, "The Hair Of My Cock"; the band subsequently toured internationally to adoring fans all over the world.".  Really?   It's "immortal"?  And does one gig in LA and one gig in Vancouver count as "all over the world"?  STFU. 

[BlobVanDam]

I use Wikipedia a lot - I'm not doing peer-reviewed academic research, here, so a quick set of facts is a good thing to springboard into more research if the subject warrants - so you get a feel for things after a while.   I don't mind "stupid edits" (though it is annoying when I know more than the wiki page; to date I haven't edited one), but what bugs me is badly written text, and, worse, when something reads like a press release with a bunch of subjective things. 

I can't remember the band, but it was a Mickey Ratt or Shark Island or someone like that, 18 minutes of fame if you count being known on Sunset Strip as "fame", and the text was written like it was a segue into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame - stuff like "and so Fred Frick went into the studio with legendary singer Sam Speedo in tow, the result being the finely crafted and now-immortal, "The Hair Of My Cock"; the band subsequently toured internationally to adoring fans all over the world.".  Really?   It's "immortal"?  And does one gig in LA and one gig in Vancouver count as "all over the world"?  STFU. 

A lot of wikipedia pages for small time musicians (and other people) read like they were written by that person, and I have no doubt they probably were.

[TheOutlawXanadu]

I've actually spent a lot of time on some DT articles, and nothing makes me more angry than a dumb edit.

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

When MP left, the day or two after featured an absolutely spectacular meltdown of edits on the Wikipedia page.  Truly lol-worthy moment.  Link

Examples:

[ResultsMayVary]

If that's really what people want to devote their time to, then by all means. It's fairly pathetic, though.

[Madman Shepherd]

I was going to go edit it, but there are so many changes itss a pain in the ass and you can't simply undo it.

When I tried to do that, I got a notice that had said too many edits had taken place between the time I tried it and the edit which was two days prior or so. 

I use Wikipedia a lot - I'm not doing peer-reviewed academic research, here, so a quick set of facts is a good thing to springboard into more research if the subject warrants - so you get a feel for things after a while.   I don't mind "stupid edits" (though it is annoying when I know more than the wiki page; to date I haven't edited one), but what bugs me is badly written text, and, worse, when something reads like a press release with a bunch of subjective things. 

I can't remember the band, but it was a Mickey Ratt or Shark Island or someone like that, 18 minutes of fame if you count being known on Sunset Strip as "fame", and the text was written like it was a segue into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame - stuff like "and so Fred Frick went into the studio with legendary singer Sam Speedo in tow, the result being the finely crafted and now-immortal, "The Hair Of My Cock"; the band subsequently toured internationally to adoring fans all over the world.".  Really?   It's "immortal"?  And does one gig in LA and one gig in Vancouver count as "all over the world"?  STFU. 

A lot of wikipedia pages for small time musicians (and other people) read like they were written by that person, and I have no doubt they probably were.

https://www.theonion.com/article/mark-paul-gosselaar-obviously-authored-own-imdb-tr-5172

[vazquez]

I have edited it, it was nice, but some bad things are back - i.e., Sherinian as "vocal". I´m the user "krieger".

But it´s a lot better than before - without the Nightmare Cinema... and without Stone or Collins...

[Madman Shepherd]

I have edited it, it was nice, but some bad things are back - i.e., Sherinian as "vocal". I´m the user "krieger".

But it´s a lot better than before - without the Nightmare Cinema... and without Stone or Collins...

But Stone and Collins were official vocalists. 

Collins was technically Majesty but the timeline goes back to the beginning of the band and the first 4 years were Majesty. 

Stone, like it or not, was an official vocalist.  He did one show with the band where he was announced as their new vocalist.  That is also the reason they were so gun shy about naming Chris Cintron as an official vocalist because they jumped the gun with Stone that ended up being a disaster.  Cintron, was with the band for about 6 months but sadly they never deemed him "official"

[Grizz]

[vazquez]

But Stone and Collins were official vocalists. 

Collins was technically Majesty but the timeline goes back to the beginning of the band and the first 4 years were Majesty. 

Ok, I can accept Collins. But Stone? No way. He was not important at all to the whole.

But maybe one thing would work - do like, i.e., the Black Sabbath page - a new entry just for "Dream Theater members". On the main page, only the most importants. In the other page, put anyone you want.

The same with bootlegs and tours - there could be a separate page with "DT discography".

The page as it is, is too crowded.

[Madman Shepherd]

But Stone and Collins were official vocalists. 

Collins was technically Majesty but the timeline goes back to the beginning of the band and the first 4 years were Majesty. 

Ok, I can accept Collins. But Stone? No way. He was not important at all to the whole.

But maybe one thing would work - do like, i.e., the Black Sabbath page - a new entry just for "Dream Theater members". On the main page, only the most importants. In the other page, put anyone you want.

The same with bootlegs and tours - there could be a separate page with "DT discography".

The page as it is, is too crowded.

The debate isn't over whether he was important or not but whether he was official. 

He was announced as the official vocalist.  The official biography mentions his tenure as official.  When you think about it, that fiasco actually helps tell the story and was an important part of why they held out to get the perfect frontman, James LaBrie. 

[vazquez]

Ok. I see your point, even though I don´t agree - for me, Stone is dust, nobody, too small to really matter. And I even have the bootleg of I&W demos.

And the wikipedia page for DT is bloody overlong and full of useless informations, like Stone or Joe Nobody or a award that Portnoy got in a magazine from Venezuela or whatever.

But as you wish - I won´t put my finger on it anymore. Undo everything I have edited, if you like.

After all, maybe one of you is Stone himself... or his brother or his best friend. 

[Madman Shepherd]

Ok. I see your point, even though I don´t agree - for me, Stone is dust, nobody, too small to really matter. And I even have the bootleg of I&W demos.

And the wikipedia page for DT is bloody overlong and full of useless informations, like Stone or Joe Nobody or a award that Portnoy got in a magazine from Venezuela or whatever.

But as you wish - I won´t put my finger on it anymore. Undo everything I have edited, if you like.

After all, maybe one of you is Stone himself... or his brother or his best friend. 

haha.  I may go back and change some stuff but I don't understand all that computer lingo so it will take me a while to figure it out.  I appreciate your input and agree that there is a lot of useless info all over that page.

I will admit, I looked into buying a CD from Stone.  I contacted him and he responded but said his solo album wasn't done but would email when it was finished.  That was maybe a decade ago.  Since then all evidence of him has disappeared. 

[FusedInMetal]

Do we need any more evidence?

#dreamtheater #plagiarismsucks

[KevShmev]

No,

It's the internet, FFS.

[Stadler]

Ok. I see your point, even though I don´t agree - for me, Stone is dust, nobody, too small to really matter. And I even have the bootleg of I&W demos.

And the wikipedia page for DT is bloody overlong and full of useless informations, like Stone or Joe Nobody or a award that Portnoy got in a magazine from Venezuela or whatever.

But as you wish - I won´t put my finger on it anymore. Undo everything I have edited, if you like.

After all, maybe one of you is Stone himself... or his brother or his best friend. 

haha.  I may go back and change some stuff but I don't understand all that computer lingo so it will take me a while to figure it out.  I appreciate your input and agree that there is a lot of useless info all over that page.

I will admit, I looked into buying a CD from Stone.  I contacted him and he responded but said his solo album wasn't done but would email when it was finished.  That was maybe a decade ago.  Since then all evidence of him has disappeared.

Not taking sides, but just throwing it out there....

isn't the point of a Wikipedia page to throw the information out there - factually - and let the reader decide what is "important" or not? 

I'm a pretty smart guy.  I don't know everything, but the things I take interest in, I tend to know a LOT about.  We used to call it "living in the footnotes".   I don't want someone arbitrarily deciding, on my behalf, that Steve Stone "isn't important enough to warrant a mention".  No, I get it, we can't mention every single person that ever shook Mike's hand, but if it is part of the story - and let's not kid: the frustration within the band surrounding vocalists pre-LaBrie is a MASSIVE part of the story, even if any one member may or may not be - it has to be mentioned.

Steve Stone was there.  He was introduced to at least one non-family, non-friend, non-team member as a "member of Dream Theater".  He's in.  That to me is not subject to opinion, debate, or judgement.