Talk:DragonForce/Archive 1

Because ZP is no longer in the band

I think ZP should have an article of his own now, I seriously have so much info to write about him coming from reliable sources. Just... I need help with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.68.240.53 (talk) 09:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

What Happened to ZP's page?

I recall having seen ZP have his own article, what happened? -Wolfinator-x —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfinator-x (talk • contribs) 07:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

It was redirected since it doesn't assert his individual notability. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 17:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Victor but how does that even make sense? All other members of the band have their own articles without having any what you call it "individual notability". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.68.240.53 (talk) 09:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Notability (music): "Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases. Members of two notable bands are generally notable enough for their own article."

It seems that all the other guys have been or are in other bands besides DragonForce. (Except Vadim Pruzhanov, I'm not sure why he has his own article.) ×××BrightBlackHeaven^(talk)××× 11:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

87.68.240.53, do you actually know what individual notability stands for? Since Herman Li, Sam Totman, Vadim Pruzhanov, Dave Mackintosh and Frédéric Leclercq have worked in other notable bands, they are consequently notable, individually. As for ZP Theart, he has worked in a not-so-notable side project by Sam. Does it really counts as an assertion of individual notability? Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 17:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

What about Pruzhanov? ×××BrightBlackHeaven^(talk)××× 21:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can see, it could be redirected to DragonForce. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 00:23, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I am 87.68.240.53... yes I know what that stands for, are you implying I am dumb or something? ZP was in a band called Easy Voodoo. He was in Sam totman's side project. He was also in power quest's demo. These things are more than capable of him having his own article. And you never mentioned those because you basically don't know crap about his past and which bands/projects he was part of before. He deserves an article and I'll do my best to create one if people around here are willing to help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.228.154.7 (talk) 07:57, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

No one's implying anything about other editors. Anyway, Easy Voodoo or the mentioned side project don't seem to have their own articles so apparently the bands are not notable, so ZP has has not been a member of "two or more notable bands". ×××BrightBlackHeaven^(talk)××× 09:03, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Just thought he's implying something about me... and I think it's pathetic that Vadim Pruzhanov's article has no bands with articles yet he got a semi-full article full of biographical info about him and some other stuff, which isn't even sourced... how is that?... Yet even creating an article for ZP needs so much hassle to be done. People just don't care I presume. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.228.154.7 (talk) 09:43, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Check again, Pruzhanov doesn't have an article and never should've. It's not about "not caring", Wikipedia just has to have some standards for inclusion. ×××BrightBlackHeaven^(talk)××× 09:51, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Two bands that ZP was part of at some point have articles: Shadow Warriors and Power Quest. They aren't notable, but they got articles... I dunno what point you're trying to make. Anyway, atleast vadim's article should be redirected or something. It has no sources and no individual notabillity —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.228.154.7 (talk) 09:52, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah I see somebody has already redirected it without me noticing. Anyway, I am well aware of wikipedia's standards, just pointing out my impression of all this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.228.154.7 (talk) 09:54, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Watch your words, dear IP, while I'm not implying that you are dumb (that was a problem of your interpretation), you are explicitly saying I "basically don't know crap". Well, I know that ZP's and Vadim's pages, as they were written, failed the notability guidelines. Knowing that worths more than knowing every demo that ZP has contributed with vocals. If you think both musicians deserve an article, then go ahead and create them. How come you want people to help you if you treat them like this? Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 17:35, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

You REALLY don't know crap about how strong the individual notabillity of ZP is. He was in enough other projects to deserve an article of his own, it is just that people don't really show interest in creating an article for him. It's also not about something "worth" more over another. If I happen to start writing an article abotu him without any help its end will be the same as it was last time, deleted or redirected. I gave up on trying since nobody is willing to help, whether I am "treating" people good or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.229.215.253 (talk) 00:57, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what was your intention by erasing the section, but that's vandalism. Have you read what I wrote? I said the page, as written, didn't assert his individual notability, I'm not saying he has no individual notability, so don't go saying I don't know crap about his individual notability, because that's simply not true. Neither is it true that people are not interested. If you write an article that doesn't assert notability, it will be redirected or deleted. If you write a fine page, it will be kept. It's simple. If you want people to help, start by helping yourself and building up a decent reputation here and not treating others the way you did. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 02:13, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

No way is Dragonforce straight power metal

I know the band call themselves "extreme power metal" but hey come on we all know that real power metal is basically NWOBHM with a focus on fantasy and with a "clean" vocal style. Just because a group label themselves under a genre it doesn't make them right. Pantera used to call themselves power metal before they started to call themselves "power groove". HTF is this " power metal"? Great music but its not power metal, I mean listen to the complex guitaring and the keyboards etc. This is Progressive, Symphonic or Neo-classical Metal. definetely not straight power metal. The guitaring is more like something written by Yngwie Malmsteen - Neo-classical metal.

Well, nobody has changed the genre in the infobox for weeks, excpet some vandals who added "gay metal" and stuff, so I guess power/speed metal is just fine. I'm not a guitarist myself, but I don't consider the guitaring complex, only because it's fast and diverse. For me, prog metal has elements like odd time signatures and complexity in all instruments...I don't know, DF just doesn't sound progressive to me. Nor symphonic, 'cause Vadim's keyboards are used for solos and to add a simple background "atmosphere" that match the fantasy themed-lyrics. It may not be their intention, but most people recall DF because of Sam and Herman, despite the other member's skills. What I want to say here is that speed/power metal seems to label them more appropriately. Victor Lopes (talk) 18:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Speed does not define musical complexity. Their songs lack most if not all the necessary conditions to be considered any of the genres you listed.24.16.153.102 (talk) 06:55, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I've said it like twelve times today: Just because a band claims to be "Extreme Power Metal" does not make them such. These things are determined based on stylistic characteristics. I'll also state that just because I tell you "I am the greatest sex machine to ever walk the earth" doesn't make it true. They are, as a matter of fact, stylistically SPEED METAL. Read the speed metal article and this will elucidate itself. Aramilalpha (talk) 20:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

More like an ecyclopedia and less like a fanpage

Some changes should be made to make this more like an encyclopedic entry and less like an advertisement for the band. Moving the big blue play button to the bottom would be a good change. Compare this to an entry for another band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.122.128.224 (talk) 23:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Progressive Metal

Could they be considered Progressive Metal? I know it might sound stupid, but I personally think they have a Progressive Metal sound.

(Their MySpace page cites them as Progressive)

And the intro to "The Flame of Youth" is in 5/4 time signature, which must be considered progressive.

MySpace is not a reliable source for Genre determination. Occasional complex rhythms (i.e. The Flame of Youth intro) does not qualify the band as "progressive", as the vast majority of DragonForce music is Power Metal. 5/4 isn't terribly complicated at that. Ultimate77 00:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know their MySpace page labeled them as Progressive. Huh. Well, I personally think they have a progressive sound.

I genuinely find it very difficult to call DragonForce progressive without laughing, in the same way that I can't call something like Cannibal Corpse melodic. The song structures are basic (verse-chorus-solo) and all very similar. The drums play a constant and regular blast beat while the bass mostly plays simple one-note rhythm lines. The songs in general have very little thought put into them in terms of writing and the lyrics, while epic, are not deep or conceptual in the slightest. The unusual time signatures are minimal at best, alright 5/4, but Them Bones is in 7/8 and I don't think you'd call Alice in Chains a prog-rock group. And their MySpace doesn't mean anything, if they had hip-hop listed there would you think they played that genre? Having said all this, I must say i do like DragonForce's music a lot and am not trying to put them down by this, in fact I often defend them from criticism. I just like progressive music as well, and I like to separate my prog form my not-prog-not-even-by-a-long-shot-in-fact-they-are-the-least-prog-band-I-know-of. Offski 02:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

They're not progressive. In an interview with Total Guitar magazine (issue 162, may 2007, p42), Totman himself stated "...most of my vocal melody ideas come from pop music." "...a good melody is exactly the same whatever kind of music it is. Virtually every single song that is catchy can be split down to four component chords. That's what I like and that's how I write." . They're not even pretending to push the envelope in terms of interesting musical composition; only in raw technique. - SoulSkorpion (talk) 03:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:rj2vadoke8w3

Sourced, for one thing. If you think about it, they are progressive metal, in all three albums, but with power metal too I suppose. Unconventional song structures for one thing, with their massive long interludes. Yes/no? Seriphyn (talk) 11:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I rather doubt it. In my opinion, they hardly qualify as a prog band - allmusic.com tends to throw around loads of genres that don't always makes sense. They have large interludes of shred, but that alone doesn't make them prog - they still have many conventional song structures in their stuff as well, typical sort of verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge style of song. Most importantly though, I've never once heard them use an odd time signature, which is one of the primary signs of a prog band. In all the time I've heard them, I've heard one song outside of 4/4, and that was only 6/8 - which doesn't really qualify as them as being prog at all. ≈ The Haunted Angel 17:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I just thought the long songs meant prog, but yea odd time signatures, and even with their long lengths they follow a structure. You are right, too, about allmusic and their strange genre labels. Kamelot are death/black metal, while Nightwish are symphonic black! Seriphyn (talk) 22:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Nightwish are listed as symphonic black metal? That's hilarious! ≈ The Haunted Angel 15:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

WTF!!!! Man, Allmusic SUCKS for genres! Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

...Anyone who thinks DragonForce is even remotely proggy obviously has no clue what progressive metal is. Just because you find them to be unconventional (how in the world do you think DF's song structures are anything unique?) doesn't make it progressive. DF epitomizes popular power metal; they add nothing new to the genre. 71.162.7.14 (talk) 19:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I have a question.....why do we try to catagorize bands instead of songs? the songs have the traits and each song is different

Because this is a band you can actually try to categorize, since all the songs have the same themes, basic structure, and sound. To ask why we try to categorize bands on this of all pages is a ridiculous act in and of itself.

Perhaps, but Valley of the Damned and Fury of the Storm sound quite different, it's called Power Metal and I am getting a bit tired of people claiming this false shit about a band. I seem to find that their songs sound different, and each one sounds different. Marauder09 (talk) 19:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Double Article

Isn't there already an article of Dragonfocre? (DragonForce). If so, this page should be considered for deletion, but the infobox is nonetheless useful. User:Rick50000 22:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Speed-Power Metal?

What's the reasoning behind this? DragonForce may be fast, but they have little to do with speed metal. This change was truly inappropriate. I think I'm going to revert it. Indy Aaron 18:25, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I just had to change that a few minutes ago I would say they are very fast but still have little to do with the Speed Metal Catagorisation, I personally would call them Power metal with SOME characteristics of Progressive Metal because of the changing intricate riffs and the 8 minute long songs. Anonomous User 14:24 07/08/2006

Simply put DragonForce arn't speed-power metal I changed this to their self appointed genre "extreme power metal". I'd like to point out thought that they aren't "extreme" for growling lyrics or blast beats. It's more to do with blinding speed on guitar, I point this out in the discussion of their musical style. --Jeff24 16:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of people do not realise that fast playing does not neccesarily equate to Speed Metal. I think it only makes sense to list DragonForce as a Power Metal band, with a mention later in the article of their refering to themselves as "Extreme Power Metal," which is after all a made-up genre. --Radagast1983 08:46, 08 August 2006

You guys have completely lost touch with music. You're way too concerned over genres and labels. Can't you just enjoy the music?

• The point of an encyclopaedia is to be concerned with labels. If this bothers you then you're reading the wrong site.

I agree with the above, but still, this is an encyclopaedic article - people who read about music in a book can't exactly just "enjoy the music". --Dayn 04:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

While we're here, many people (one or two by my knowledge) have added progressive metal to the page. I for one don't think they fit the mould at all, just another band which has a lot of lead guitar and long solos, which in my opinion doesn't qualify. --Dayn 01:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that they qualify for progressive. After all, they categorise themselves as that and they have very intricate unusual and layered songs and solos, with a lot of unusual and innovative guitar effects designed to sound unusual. It was me who edited them to progressive last night, sorry I didn't read the talk page first. I'm new to editing, unless you count the one page I created a looong time ago. 17 November~

This is a quote from the introduction to the progressive metal article:

Progressive metal is a genre of heavy metal music which shares traits with progressive rock including use of complex compositional structures, odd time signatures, and intricate instrumental playing. The high level of musical proficiency is often combined with a lyrical counterpart in the form of epic textual concepts, resulting in lengthy songs and concept albums. As a result of these factors, progressive metal is rarely heard on mainstream radio and video programs.

It don't think that DragonForce fit in this description: what are the odd time signatures? complex compositional structures? Note that complex compositional structures and/or intricate instrumental playing do not make the band "progressive" by themselves, otherwise Cradle of Filth or Stratovarius would also qualify. Therefore "intricate unusual and layered songs and solos" aren't enough to belong to the progressive metal genre.

The lyrics are epic, but do not form "textual concepts", their songs aren't unusually lengthy, and their albums aren't concept albums. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if I heard them on the radio.

If you do do a google search, you will find 4 times more hits for "power metal"+DragonForce than for "progressive metal"+DragonForce, which is a significant difference.

The band also claim that they play "extreme power metal", which you must have noticed isn't included in the list of genres, essentially because it doesn't exist. You can't just have blind faith in what the band say they are; they're hardly unbiased in that matter!

If you compare them to other progressive metal artists (Queensrÿche, Ayreon, Evergrey...), there is a significant difference IMO. IronChris | (talk) 16:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

But the only boundaries of Progressive Metal are the willingness to have unconvenctional, complex and long songs that are OFTEN (by no means always) combined with textual concepts and concept albums. DragonForce fit this description. Pink Floyd didn't always write concept albums with such themes, but would you even consider to debate that they are progressive rock? 23 November~

DragonForce doesn't fit the concept album part. All their songs are similar; does not mean they're related as a concept. Also, their songs don't actually "progress", which would be a hint for progressive music. It's a normal catchy song with long instrumental parts that don't really go anywhere at all. The solos are usually just useless but fun wankery which go nowhere. If you shorten said instrumental parts, you'd get a veritable song easily consumable by the masses on radio.

By comparison, you could take a Stratovarius song. They're usually hardly progressive. Make intros a bit longer, make the solos longer, and you have a song equivelant to DragonForce. Now... Take Dream Theater's songs, like "Erotomania" or "In the Name of God". Can you cut much out to make it shorter? No, many parts are different, and they progress.

My point is, DragonForce should not be progressive based on either length or complexity. Like, how do their songs progress? How do the solos progress? The solo parts in many of their songs are similar and usually interchangeable. Also, the only thing complex is their dual lead guitar harmonies, and that's only complex because they play it fast. Not to mention the rhythm is very very simple. --Dayn 13:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

You slightly misunderstood... I meant that they don't have to fit into concept albums to be progressive. The song structures and lead guitars are very complex, and the songs have many sections and extended solos, be they keyboard or guitar. 23 November~

But what does it mean by "complex compositional structures"? I'm unsure about that. I can see no odd time signatures; if you include a bit of Soldiers of the Wasteland (which in my opinion is bordering on progressive), all you'd get was a 2/4 here and maybe there, but that's all; but it's hardly an odd time signature, nor do they use them much at all. Intricate instrumental playing, yes; but alone, does not qualify. Steve Vai plays intricately, but he's not considered progressive. Also, this part:

"The high level of musical proficiency is often combined with a lyrical counterpart in the form of epic textual concepts, resulting in lengthy songs and concept albums. As a result of these factors, progressive metal is rarely heard on mainstream radio and video programs." Epic, yeah, concepts, I suppose. But look at the lyrics to most of their songs; all are very similar, are not serious, and don't really talk about any concept at all, just "fluff". But, the keyword in that paragraph of the description... "result". It says as a result of those factors, it is rarely heard on radio/video. A result cannot be a result if many of the factors are missing. --Dayn 13:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I personally think they lean towards the progressive end of things... their songs remind me of Dream Theater's Train of Thought album and other similar things, albeit a bit more high pitched (and more standard time signatures). However, I'm not gonna say that I "know" they're progressive. I'm glad to see someone making such a good argument for the other side. ~24 November

They're absolutely not progressive. The songs are fast, include harmonised duelling guitars, but the compositional structure is extremely simple and traditional; see my above (unsigned) quote (in the "Progressive Metal" section of this talk page) from an interview with Totman in which he states frankly that DragonForce songs are inspired by and written in the same manner as pop music. There is nothing remarkable or original about the composition of DragonForce songs - the remarkable thing is the technical virtuosity of the guitar players. Totman writes for "catchy" and plays it fast. Cool as it might be, it's not progressive. Furthermore, the lyrics of DF songs are of dubious literary merit, and I don't believe they're intended as such. Meaningless lines that are written just to sound good and fit into the meter of the song ("Fly on wings of shining steel are burning so bright", which doesn't even make grammatical sense). They're there to carry the meter and the melody, not to be meaningful or discuss an issue or even really tell much of a story. A good rule of thumb is that progressive music is often not catchy and certainly doesn't aim to be catchy; DragonForce is the exact opposite. - SoulSkorpion (talk) 03:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

The genre should be rewroten, if one of the fastest bands dont qualify for "Speed" metal, then what does, where does the origin of "Speed" metal even come from then? Ive listened to many of the songs that apparently 'qualify' for speed metal, and none of them sound as fast as half the songs from DragonForce. It makes 0 sense 76.26.189.65 (talk) 06:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a retarded comment. Thrash metal is faster than speed metal so does that mean Dragonforce is thrash metal? NO. Speed isn't everything. Neo-classical metal, black metal and even death metal are also faster than most speed metal. Means jack shit. Dragonforce isn't speed metal. Weak power metal with some prog infl. 'Nuff saidBlizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 00:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Kinda since all their albums are labeled as power metal, seems obvious to call the band's main genre power metal. I don't see why not. -MetalKommandant (talk) 22:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

lol. Speed Metal is just speeded up Heavy Metal, primarily NWOBHM. Compare Helloween to say Iron Maiden. Power metal is the same but with a different higher pitched vocal style. Try Pantera's power metal album or Manowar again to NWOBHM. Pantera's power metal album does border line on thrash due to some of the thrash riffing. Progressive metal & neo-classical are what the more technical & talented guitarists tend to play as it draws influence from the very quick & hard to play guitaring of classical (have u ever tried playing Mozart on guitar? - imagine) and also Jazz & other difficult world musics. Although Dragon Force may have clean power metal style vocals I would agree they draw much influence from a technical ability of neo-classical or progressive metal.

Move

Since the actual spelling is "DragonForce", the name of this article should be adjusted to reflect that. Does anyone know offhand what the procedure for doing this is? I don't remember where the info is on the site. -- Zarggg, 00:15 1 July 2004 (UTC)

It's called "Move page", and its location should be onscreen somewhere (depends what skin you're using). You can ask questions at Wikipedia:Help desk. Happy editing, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 00:21, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Bloody hell, I should have figured that out. Thanks. :) -- Zarggg, 00:23 1 July 2004 (UTC)

Their official site says "DragonForce - Official Site - www.dragonforce.com" and that capitalization is used throughout. --Keolah 04:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

POV

This article reads like a fan page in its current version. Can we have some NPOV, please? -- The Anome 10:41, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it does. Could you be more specific? Better yet, point out ways to improve it. Supersonic^ 13:44, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

I think he might be referring to the first section, but damned if I can see what's wrong with it. The only thing I can think of is word choice, but that seems farily harmless to me. Zarggg 19:43, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Made some changes; could we get a review on this again, please? Zarggg 19:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the page should be reviewed, as it does read like a fan page. "Jesus Christ himself reportedly said "Find these Dragonforce fellows and cannonize the fuck out of 'em!" after hearing Sonic Firestorm for the first time." Would be a good example of this. Evoloution of sound should be looked at too. MichaelRatcliffe December 6

I made several changes to fix the article. The "Evolution of the Sound" section is, however, hardly salvageable. I would remove it completely. --Sn0wflake 17:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Good choice Sn0wflake, I am going to take out the references to Jesus MichaelRatcliffe December 6

I have, after being advised by Sn0wflake, removed my previous submissions about "Similar Bands" and instead have given informaton on Dragonforce's own self-glorifying genre, "Extreme Power Metal". This does seem to abide by NPOV rules as it is factual. Also the "Evolution of Sound" section was subject to vandalism, but as it stands currently, it is quite factual. If we cannot use even the slightest bit of description in articles then there won't be much information to go on Wikipedia! For example, saying they create a bombastic sound, as it states, is in my eyes acceptable as it is factual since Dragonforce are hardly melancholic. I do realise the rules of NPOV, however, and should this debate be carried on then so be it! However please do not outrightly revert the page as many small re-phrasing of sentences have been done by me to give the article a higher standard of English (eg. the image caption.) Thanks! Soulhunter123

I have made another NPOV edit in the Biography section, removing ", this is also why Dragonforce is more technically proficient than many power metal bands, because of their extreme metal history. " which sounds pretty self-aggrandizing and is probably hard to back up factually. -- Bdoserror 18:48, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Who the hell reverted the musical style section? It shows complete bias, and should be toned down to bare technical terms (which even then are unnecessary). ReignInTiki 08:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Use of Italics

Is the apparent emphasis of words like bombastic and thundering in the "Evolution of Sound" section necessary? Bdoserror 17:18, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

No, not really. --Sn0wflake 20:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

About "extreme" power metal

My edit summary may not have been very clear when I removed "extreme" (particularly since I accidentally pressed 'enter' by mistake before having finished it). "Extreme power metal" is not an existing genre; see List of heavy metal genres for a list of genres that can be used on Wikipedia. We shouldn't go around coining new genres, or this will get way out of hand with each band having a different genre. Unless I am mistaken, DragonForce invented the term "extreme power metal". Therefore, I see no problem with explaining this further on in the article, but not in the first line of introduction. Tankard call their music "alcoholic metal", but the introduction line doesn't read "Tankard is an alcoholic metal band".

What is more, extreme power metal redirects to the DragonForce article. It is therefore useless to wikify it, and someone browsing the page will just think "what's extreme power metal? and why isn't there an article for it?". So, as I say, it's useless in the introduction.

The WikiProject Metal has been trying to standardise heavy metal genres, so let's stick to the ones in the list of heavy metal genres. Thanks. IronChris | (talk) 17:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

• That's fine, all I wanted was an edit summary. --Aleron235 17:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I understand. Take care. IronChris | (talk) 21:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

• Maybe the whole 'extreme power metal' thing should be dealt with in a style similar to the H.I.M page. HIM invented the term 'love metal' to describe their music, but it doesn't credit it as the actual genre, just that the style of music is 'often referred to' as such.

Ditto with KMFDM and "Ultra Heavy Beat". JD79 20:58, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok some people need some tutoring on classifications and musical genres. Clearly DragonForce are power metal there is no dispute on that issue. The problem lies where the band itself has given themselves a new genre "extreme power metal". I'd like to point out thought that they aren't "extreme" for growling lyrics or blast beats. It's more to do with blinding speed on guitar (I point this out in the discussion of their musical style). I think grounds for a new genre being invented stem from a band showing that they are different in musical sound. As a power metal fan for a very long time now I am fluent in most power metal music, trust me...DragonForce ARE extreme power metal. Since the band, record company and majority of fans recognise this I think that the genre "extreme power metal" has been established and we have a pioneering band in that genre. Please DON'T put DragonForce as speed metal or power metal or anything ridiculous. They are extreme power metal. Thank you. --Jeff24 16:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe I read somewhere, or perhaps saw in an interview, that they call themselves "extreme power metal", because they incorporate plenty of other styles of metal into their mainly power metal sound, hence "extreme".--Dayn 07:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Obviously the genre they consider themselves to be of should be discussed, but I think it's a little early to be calling them "an extreme power metal" group in the heading. How would anyone know what that genre is unless they were already familiar with the lone purveyors of said genre, DragonForce? I agree that extreme power metal is a fine description of them, but I'm not sure I think it should be used officially. --The Shrike 16:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You guys might wanna take a peak at the band members' profiles to ensure conformity with genres. Lovok 14:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The band and the fans can call themselves whatever they like, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such must use verifiable, consensual terms. This is not the case of "extreme power metal". Some members of WikiProject Metal have been trying hard to homogenise the genres; we can't start calling bands by the terms they make up for themselves, or otherwise Manowar will be "true metal", Running Wild "pirate metal", HIM "love metal", Tankard "alcoholic metal", Finntroll "troll metal", etc. And if nothing else can convince you, please read WP:NEO. IronChris | (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Just a little note on "extreme" power metal. I think the reason for this definition is not to do with them being related to any kind of extreme metal, but that they take all of the aspects of power metal (fast guitars, epic solos, anthemic choruses, fantasy-based lyrics) and take them to the extreme. DragonForce, in my own words, play power metal with everything set to 'maximum'. Offski 15:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

For another 'extreme power metal' band, try Hibria. I've only heard 'High Speed Breakout' from Defying the Rules, but they seem to fall within the genre to me. -- Sasuke Sarutobi 13:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

They use harsh backing vocals in their new album and are know for using some blast beats. SuperRadX 19:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Redirect?

Is the redirect from "DragonHeart" really useful? I think it should go either to a disambiguation page, or to the film (Dragonheart), if anything. I mean, there are probably very few people (any?) who are going to look up "DragonHeart" with the intention of finding the band, and it is therefore pretty useless. IronChris | (talk) 20:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced criticism

The "Critiscism" section that was recently added contains some dubious affirmations, one of them being that their lyrics are considered by "many" to be "over-commercialised". If that is so, may one provide examples to back up his claim, as I really can not consider their lyrics as over-commercialised, fantasy-inspired lyrics can hardly be seen as "commercial". You are thinking of Limp Bizkit, holmes. When DragonForce start singing about all their money and bitches and how nobody oughta mess with them, you can rightfully say that they are over-commercialised. --Voievod 23:30, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Fucking exactly. Their lyrics may be corny (i still love them) but not commercialized. AshTM 05:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Dragonforce commercialized...lol. They sound unlike anything I've ever listened to, and basically takes me back to my Nintendo days as a kid. It's just fun music to listen to, not every freaking song has to have some deep meaning to it. DF is a nice, fresh breath of air. -- Dan N.

Remove the cleanup notice?

IMO since last time I saw the Dragonforce article it's been drastically cleaned up and there's no need for the cleanup required box. There could still be improvements of course but by this point I think it's just a distraction.

Criticism needed?

I am no means a Dragonforce fan, but this section seems to be started by someone who simply disliked the band and wanted to get his opinion out. Dragonforce is the only band I've seen on this site with a criticism section. I can think of atleast fifty bands that I've seen recieve "criticism" from other popular bands, but their sections remaim clean. It's no coincidence that Dragonforce is the only one, someone has an agenda to make them look bad. I say remove it completly.

Hmm... I'm inclined to agree. None of it's sourced or referenced either, so it's all unfounded basically. --Dayn 22:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Criticism is important in a band's page, as long as there are reasonalbe sources and references. I added a criticism section with plenty of that.

How is it important? It'll be biased, and best left out of an encyclopaedic article. Now, if it was their actions, like Metallica's Napster controvery, maybe... but I don't see the point of a musical critique in an encyclopaedic article, better left for actual music sites. Not to mention all the criticism that has been added to this page has always been bad; no good criticism at all, so there's not even a chance to fork into two different points of view (luckily). No other band's page has criticism. Maybe on a music review site. --Dayn 22:00, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, on that note, many band's albums' articles on Wikipedia have professional reviews listed in the info box; out of 5 stars, from apparently reputable sources. That's perfectly fine, but you'll notice no actual criticism is on the page, except a link to the review, and what the review gave it. --Dayn 22:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Dragonforce an educated musician's opinion

Opinion piece- please see WP:TALK
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I'm not sure who started the comments in this forum but I enjoy everything from classical music to power metal, whatever genre you can think of I probably like it unless of course it's rap because you see I like music and these two things "music" and "rap" have very little in common. I think that Dragonforce is an incredible band and I'm going to give my feed back on them. I just learned of their existence about 3 weeks ago from my cousin who knew that I've been playing guitar for 15 years and counting and also that I love many genre's (from classical, to jazz, to extreme power metal) of music so he suggested them to me. I've been a musician since the age of 12 and am now 30 and have studied various instruments, including voice (I was in 2 different vocal jazz groups for a period of 3 years and took voice lessons for over 6 years) and music. I've taken several college classes on musical theory, which teach nomenclature and classical theory, progressive theory and many more things that take quite some time to understand thoroughly, I even got a minor in music. I have to say that Dragonforce although aimed for the younger audience is by far one of the most talented bands of our time. Although the musical progressions themselves are not that incredible what they do harmony wise is amazing especially at the speed they do it. The technique used in every instrument in the band is tops, few if any people I know can perform with such skill and again I've been playing guitar for 15 years and have associated with great musicians all my life. The singer is extremely talented and the melodic combinations of guitar solos are unrivaled by any other metal band in history and the keyboard is also incredible beyond anything I've heard before (Through the fire and the flames) plus the drummer has to be close to if not the best speed drummer out there. I went to their concert in Salt Lake City Avalon Theater 9/16/06 it sold out and was the best concert I've seen in years. They play better live than their recorded albums. One of the most amazing things to me was watching Herman and Sam reaching around the neck of their guitars in the middle of 16th note rythms and then do tapping (with their left hand now playing backwards) for about ten seconds then reach back around and play the rest of a line. Herman pulls off some of the most amazing sweep picking mixed with artificial harmonics that I've ever seen before. Many people mistake some of Herman's sweep picking to be keyboard because he obtains high pitches that can't be reached on the guitar without certain techniques. Some good examples are "Black Winter Night" at 2:50-2:55 in the song or "Through the Fire and the Flames" at 5:14-5:19 in the song, yes I know it's hard to believe but that's Herman on the guitar that's not keyboard he is so precise that he is actually doing artificial harmonics at the same time he sweeps through 32nd notes. While I was at the concert there was a moment when the audience all stopped moshing and stood in a stupor of thought gazing up at the stage while Herman Li shredded through the most amazing harpegios I've ever heard live in The Valley of the Damned (guitar solo 3 minutes and 23 seconds into the song) for what seemed like 2 minutes there wasn't a sound in the midst of the previous chaos of mosh pits just the sound of Herman slicing through the silence. The truth is that as soon as the drums came back in the 2nd time the moshing started back up almost 2 times as chaotic. Herman Li and Sam Totman both the guitarist's in the band on several occasions during very amazing and difficult harmonized solos appeared to be having conversations and even laughing about each others comments. These guys are definitely beyond good they are incredible and watching them live is the best way one can discover this. These guys make previous speed metal bands look like oldies from the 60's and any true lover of the metal genre's will love them. I still love tons of old hardcore thrash and speed metal bands but these guys have truly earned there own genre (extreme power metal) they have broken a completely new sound that previously has not been rivaled or accomplished. There has been nothing as hardcore as these guys before and they actually sing on key which adds to their level of talent which far excels previous metal bands of this type of sound and the guitarist's even harmonize vocals while playing ridiculous 32nd note rhythms tapping included. It's actually quite cool to be able to sing along to a memorable melody at a thrash metal concert, instead of a low grumble because the vocals are nothing but the sound of a sick dying old guy trying to cough something up. As for me I feel one of Dragonforce' most amazing songs for melodic (keyboard, guitar, and vocals) accomplishments also speed drumming is "Black Winter Night" from the Valley of the Damned album. I say kudos to Dragonforce, what an amazing accomplishment actually deserving a new genre in a day when we had almost already created every genre one could possibly think up. Keep on rockin the free world! Peace. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dfox77 (talk • contribs) . This is very biased, look [here] to see how sloppy they are. /\ The video in the link above has been removed because of copyright violation... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.34.108 (talk) 02:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC) Re: - You're absolutely right dude! Finally not some guitar noobs yapping about what's s**t. - Rokai Hey, I don't mean to insult you or your opinion or anything but. You said that Dragonforce deserves it's own genre right? Well I disagree. No offense (and I have seen them play live) but compared to their albums their live performence was disappointing. They played sloppy, the singer couldn't reach the high notes he could in the album, and you can't even hear the keyboards. And the drummer is NOT the best speed drummer out their, in case you didn't notice he plays the same drumbeat in every song. Sorry but they're still better bands out their that they could never compare to.Emo777 (talk) 06:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC) Correction He doesnt sweep harmonics, he uses a whammy pedal. Oh. Oh well, I learnt to do it anyway after reading the above. Good stuff though difficult. Sounds like a music box on the higher frets and strings. --Dayn 07:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC) They also achieve many effects by actually morphing into dragons and winged goblins while playing on stage, this is not shown on their videos as the savagery with which they rock out would violate the Geneva convention. That's actually a hilarious comment but with how crazy they are on stage I can't completely disagree with it. This is from the guy who wrote comment #11 dragonforce an educated musician's opinion, however it should have been given the title a continually learning musician's opinion of Dragonforce. That's correct he is using a whammy pedal I usually never use pedals and effects in fact i haven't been using them for over 10 years with the exception of distortion, chorus & reverb. So in attempts to learn some of the melodies I was only having luck getting those high pitches by using the methods I mentioned. Now I can go and get me some of those effects pedals and boxes and generate the melodies much easier. Because of how long it's been since I've been using effects I didn't even know what new options were out there, more thanks to Dragonforce for making these effects sound so appealing to me that I started realizing that effects can actually sound awesome if used correctly :) I seriously don't think that they are sloppy at all live : I have seen them live and I have to say that the soli were twice as crazy as in the studio versions ! their sound was quite unclear but I can swear that the played everything perfectly and that this "live-slopiness" myth is all about jealous or narrow-minded people. I've seen the youtube videos that portray them as sloppy and badly practised live, and I've seen them live in person twice. It doesn't add up. They were fantastic both times I saw them, so all I can think is that perhaps the videos are old or they just play better in Australia 219.90.151.144 (talk) 06:09, 9 November 2008 (UTC) I'm just giving my thoughts on critic posts above. Anyone who spreads this shit around has to be not so narrow-minded. I have no problem with people hating these guys, just dont shove your hate down this places throat, or mine. Marauder09 (talk) 20:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC) Wikipedia and it's talk pages are not forums for general discussion about subjects of it's articles. KezianAvenger 20:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC) why doesn't ZP have a profile on wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.153.134.19 (talk) 15:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC) Because he fails Wikipedia guidelines on the notability of individual artists. Victão Lopes I hear you... 16:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Tour Specifics

I removed some info on specific tour stops (Toronto) as all the information on their tour history is available on their website. If we want an article or section duplicating this information but so be it, but all things equal I see no reason to mention specific non-notable tour stops. 131.107.0.101 19:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC) (This is me, suppose reinstalling Windows unsaves your password...) Xnolanx 19:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Singles

I notice a "singles" category has been added... Umm, how can there be singles if no CD singles are released? --Dayn 00:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I've decided to remove it. Since there are no actual CD singles, it makes no sense to have a singles table; there's never going to be any info in it, so I removed it. --Dayn 01:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

"Hits"

Much the same thing as "Singles" above, really. How about we remove the hits section, and replace it with "Music Videos", like

Through the Fire and Flames, from Inhuman Rampage (link) Operation Ground and Pound, from Inhuman Rampage (link)

As it is now, I think having a list of songs that, as far as I can surmise, that fans greatly enjoy, doesn't really deserve a mention, whereas the music videos would, instead. I do suppose you could say something like "such and such is a staple song in their live performances", but it'd probably need a reference, or be played at every single show. I dunno. Thoughts? Dayn 04:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Uh, Through the Fire and Flames? Valley of the Damned? I don't think either of thsoe are ever going to leave their setlist. 219.90.151.144 (talk) 06:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Especially as none of them charted, it's hard to call them "Hits". --Bdoserror 00:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Yup, I removed them, and replaced it with music videos. Made the page for Operation Ground and Pound... seems so bare, but there isn't much to add, unless I do it like Through the Fire and Flames which I'm going to edit mercilessly. --Dayn 04:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

An unregistered user added it in again, which I removed. They will never chart, and will never be "hits". --Dayn 04:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Which is it???

At the top of the article it says

They are known for their mellow acoustic guitars, haunting lyrics, and depressing melodies.

and then in the musical style this:

1. Emphasis on speed, twin-guitar harmonies
2. Lyrics of a fantastical or epic nature
3. Use of background choral singing throughout songs
4. Generally optimistic and uplifting chorus sections (musically and lyrically)

Are we talking about the same band here? Sabalon 18:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

You probably saw an earlier revision, where an unregistered user must've gotten their bands mixed up. It was reverted. --Dayn 04:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Criticism

Why was this section deleted? It is perfeclty valid, and something that deserves to be put on this page. In order for someone to get to know something about a band, they have to be able to see all sides, good and bad. I'm putting it back up, and it will stay up until someone can offer a valid reason as to its deletion. Many other bands have a criticism section.

Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view. Done. --Dayn 05:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

This is a completely neutral point of view. It's fact. How is it not neutral? As a fan of Dragonforce I'm obviously not going to try and make a band I like look bad...look at the discussion on the youtube page, it's heated debate on whether the guitarists are posers or not, and the video shows them not performing simple lead techniques well at all. It's undeniable in that video that they played those things sloppily. You will see many comments stating that Dragonforce are great live, and many that say they are terrible live. Look [here], and view the comments for that. These are their criticisms, people should know this stuff.

[More debate on them being sloppy here]

Follow that link to see exactly what I'm talking about.

• "...and their seeming inability to replicate them live." Point of view; needs a reference as well.
• "Also adding to the suspicion is their recent "I betcha can't play this" video for Guitar One. Shown [here]" Suspicion, means not verified. Wikipedia isn't the place for allegations.
• "the video shows an obvious lack of ability to perform much simpler lead techniques than heard on their records." Apparently, they were drunk. Even if they're not; everyone has bad days. It's not obvious at all; they can play it on the album, so rather, they obviously can play it.
• "This leads to the question, if Dragonforce can't even play the simple arpeggios and tapping techniques showcased in the video, how can they play the inhuman leads on their records?" Just like I said before, everyone has bad days.
• "This has caused the band to be deemed "posers" by many metal fans, and has caused heated debate within the metal community." And people can say they're one of the best bands around. What's the point?

Furthermore, you say both sides should be known, good and bad. You've only added the bad; where's the good? Besides, Criticism in a Criticism section states:

"In general, making separate sections with the title "Criticism" is discouraged. The main argument for this is that they are often a troll magnet (see quotes in See also section below).

Criticism sections should not violate Article structures which can imply a view. These sections must not be created to marginalize criticism or critics of the article's topic or imply that this criticism is not true while the more positive claims in the rest of the article are."

Not to mention the entire section is very unencyclopaedic; it's more suited to a forum. Would you find anything similar within the Encyclopaedia Britannica? No. All it is is alluding to a single thing, which is biased towards to the negative. Hence, it shouldn't be here. It's loaded with a point of view and bias, which should not be present at all.

Which bands have you seen with criticism in Wikipedia? Metallica? No. Beatles? No. Dream Theater? No. Green Day? No. AC/DC? No. The Clash? No. Iron Maiden? No. So why should DragonForce be any different? Unfortunately I can't remove it, as I will be violating the three-revert-rule. So hopefully someone else can add their input. Look above on this talk page too; you'll notice earlier on someone else has said that DragonForce is the only page they've seen with criticism. --Dayn 09:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

While we're here, whether or not it's in it's own section is irrelevant. It's a point of view, which should not be added regardless. Whether good or bad, it does not belong. This is an informative article; it should not leave readers asking questions, nor should it sway people to a point of view. --Dayn 06:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

The criticism section was completely unsourced. More than two months was given for the cited sources to be given. None were. As such they are original research at best, and covert vandalism at worst. It should have been removed.

The thing is, though it shouldn't be labelled as criticism, you can't deny it's a very heated debate on the internet and amongst metal fans. However unless any major media source have addressed the issue then it still shouldn't be in this article. ===Prodigs 8:47, 11 Jan 2007

I would say criticism is important to state if it is in fact somewhat common. A good example would be the band Metallica and the "Sell Out" Criticism. That criticism is a large part of the bands history now given the fact that most everyone including people not a fan of the band or music has probably heard about it at some point. And criticism on that level is usually very easy to find a reference too. Within 2 minutes im sure i could find a ton of references to back up criticism about people viewing Metallica as over zealous in their legal fights with file sharing. That is the kind of criticism worth noting. But criticism so obscure towards a band like DragonForce whom already is obscure enough just makes for a feeding frenzy of people who just can't let arguments go. All that kind of adding would do is contribute to the insomnia of music geeks. I say leave it out untill there is some noteworthy criticism.XXLegendXx 19:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

personally, at first, i thought that the criticism section was crap after seeing how they seemed like they could replicate their guitar riffs and solos on music vids. but if you see them live, not only do they play everything out of tune, they have trouble playing at that speed, only the drummer and keyboards can truly play it that fast. 66.57.12.148 17:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

to be honest, i feel the same way as the last person. when i first saw it, i thought it was some people trying to degrade DF's reputation. i watched thier music vids, and thought that the guitarists were like god, the skill they played their guitars with. then i heard them live, many times. and they sucked, literally. the studio cleared everythingi up, but they can't play that fast, and they play out of tune. to be honest, in my opinion, their drummer is the most talented of the bunch, since he can play what he plays on the cd without any problem, yet no one focuses on him, or the keyboards. naturally, this is just my opinion, since this is a talk page. Itachi1452 02:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, when I saw them live they played the same speed as on the CD, and I couldn't see anything wrong with their playing other than one or two slight mistakes. Maurauth 09:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I've seen them in concert no less than three times, they sound pretty darn close to the CDs live! I blame poor audio quality of the Youtube videos (usually recorded with cellphones to begin with) for starting this common, yet unfounded criticism (nobody has even ever cited it). Everyone who I've talked to that has been to a Dragonforce concert swears that they don't play worse live. Of course, I'm sure a few of those videos are of them honestly messing up the songs, but on the whole, Dragonforce is proficient at playing their songs live --Cronohyper 22:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I have also seen them live three times, and the concerts were quite excellent all three times. At the first concert, in July 2006, I was near the back of the room, but I could hear the whole band very well. In September 2006, I was in the front row at that concert, and it was possibly the best concert I have ever seen. At the last concert, on March 31, they were supporting for Killswitch Engage, but that did NOTHING to diminish the energy and flourish with which they played their set. Anyone who has spoken with the DragonForce members knows that they take their music very seriously, regardless of what some people may say. And even moreso than the music, DragonForce focuses entirely on making their fans happy. They do read their own forum, and comments from fans in fact do influence where they choose to tour and even what the t-shirt art should look like. Therefore, I agree with the removal of the criticism section in this article. Many bands have very very bad points, yet I have never seen a more negative criticism section than what has been written in this article. Dies Mali 07:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I was honestly looking for a "Dragonforce is the laughing stock of teh internets" section, at least in the talk page. -- Sy / ^(talk) 05:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Valley of the Damned music video

Has anyone got a link? I see that there's a promotional video for it, but that's not a music video; just a live performance. I'm tempted to remove it, but maybe I'm looking in the wrong places. --Dayn 05:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

There is a promotional video on YouTube, starting with live clips but also showing some clips of them in the recording studio. Offski 20:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

POV and Opening Paragraph

I was thinking about the opening paragraph being a bit point of view. But is grandiose really a point of view? Personally, I think it's more of a fact:

gran·di·ose –adjective 1. affectedly grand or important; pompous: grandiose words. 2. more complicated or elaborate than necessary; overblown: a grandiose scheme. 3. grand in an imposing or impressive way.

I left out the psychiatric definition. Basically, I think the first two definitions of grandiose fit DragonForce's solos perfectly; they are quite overblown, and more complicated and elaborate than necessary (when compared to, say, Rhapsody of Fire or Stratovarius). So what say you? Grandiose; fact, or point of view? --Dayn 03:33, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

An Overhaul

I've added some citations to things, and tried to reword stuff. I'm not all that great at doing it, but I've made a little bit of an impact. I removed a myspace link that had no relevance as a reference, put in a cite needed tag instead...

Now, what to do with the "extreme" metal part? As far as I know, the stuff it talks about is Finnish melodic death metal like Children of Bodom and Kalmah, which is naturally a different scene to Swedish stuff. As far as I take it, this "extreme" metal part hinges solely on the other bands' talk pages, as it's all based on opinions and conjecture. I vote to simply remove the blasted thing, unless we can actually get a citation about it. --Dayn 00:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I won't do anything yet, but maybe within the week I'll remove the "extreme metal" part, as it's unsourced and the only source I find is a discussion on the bands' Wiki articles. I think it's more trivial than anything. --Dayn 06:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Kirk Hammett

Do you think it would be of any use to put in Kirk Hammett's quote saying that DragonForce have the 2 fastest guitarists he has ever heard? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.244.251.196 (talk) 11:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

I've heard that before. Although I find it interesting, I don't think it's all too interesting enough to put into the article, but what does everyone else think? --Dayn 11:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's that all that interesting, Kirk Hammet is hardly a particularly respected voice in technical guitarist circles, which is what this comment is concerned with. Had something like Michael Angelo Batio had said that, who has been voted the world's fastest guitarist in more than one poll, it would be more interesting. Bauulben 17:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe in a Miscellanea section or something as long as it is sourced. I can't see it being worked into the body of the article though.--E tac 06:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Notable, utterly so. Metallica is super notable. Kirk Hammett is also super notable, and widely known as a very fast and respected heavy metal soloist. For one of the founders of heavy metal guitar to describe DragonForce's guitar licks as "the fastest he's ever heard" is a tremendously high assessment. If Michael Jordan was to declare someone "the fastest basketball player he's ever seen", assuming that person met notability otherwise, that would surely deserve a mention on that person's page, right? Usually Kirk's pretty stingy with the compliments, too... Bullzeye ^{(Ring for Service)} 06:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Origin of Name

I seam to remember the band chose the name they have now because they didn't want to be mixed up the with film Dragonheart that had been released a few years earlier. If I recall correctly the band said this on their old MP3.com page, or has this since been proven to be incorrect? Bauulben 17:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

They were called DragonHeart originally, but changed because of a Brazilian band with the same name. As far as I know there was nothing to do with the film. It's in the article if you look. Offski 19:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Aye. DragonHeart mentions DragonForce's former name too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dayn (talk • contribs) 02:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Curse you bot. *shakesfist*--Dayn 02:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Solders of the Wastelands Sammple

It is the 6th track not the eighth one. Can someone edit that?SuperRadX 19:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Ooops, my mistake. Fixed. --h2g2bob 20:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Discrepancy in the Members/Previous Members List

Two of the original members, Steve Williams and Steve Scott, quickly left the band to form power metal outfit Power Quest.

Taking note of that and then continuing down the page to see the "Members" and "Former Members" sections 4 and 4.1 I was disappointed to see that those two were left out when it clearly states that they were original members. So if they were members then why not list them in the former members section? I'd change this discrepancy but I've no time for making yet another account on yet another site. Take care and somebody please fix this.

Tour

Trying to add that the Inhuman Rampage tour in the UK was with Firewind and All That Remains, but it's protected.

• That is because this page is semi-protected, meaning that new users and anonyms cannot edit it... I applied this protection in order to stop the severe vandalism the article suffered. If you give a source for that information, I can add it for you. You could also wait a few days until you can edit the article. Also, please sign you posts by using four tildes. --Sn0wflake 02:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, browser lagged. Well I can't find anything without looking around on blabbermouth for ages, but I suppose the source would be the fact that I was there... I could scan my ticket in, but I really can't be bothered. Can you just add it in. Maurauth 12:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Userbox?

There was a userbox...where's it at ? Can the person who made it please upload it again...Much obliged. --Voievod 00:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Why is this article protected?

At the very least, remove the qualifier "epic" in the first phrase regarding their "epic vocals." That's quite possibly the worst way to describe a band that I have ever encountered.

67.186.82.188 22:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

"Epic" doesn't really mean "really amazingly good" so much as it's a bit more like epic fantasy or epic poetry. It's more meaning that their lyrics tell a broader story, I think. DoomsDay349 00:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Your close, its not that there lyrics tell a "Broader Story" It tells a Fantasy. Something that makes you go "What if?". Think about the Storming Through Burning Fields Lyrics "And now we cross heave, while standing on the temple in the fire storm" Just that make you think something. --ReapeRs PreY (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Discography?

I'm sorry if it's somewhere in this massive talk section, but where's the rest of the discography? I assume there would be no objections if I threw in their other albums and singles?

DragonForce are about as good as my Mum JoWal 18:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)]

Requested page protection (2007-12-16)

This is starting to get ridiculous. Anyway... I have made a request for page protection at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection (or simply: "WP:RFPP") due to high level of IP vandalism. Should be fulfilled shortly. lightsup55 ( T | C ) 22:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Mainstream

do you think that DragonForce could be considered even remotely "mainstream"? I personally think they are, because 1) They're in Guitar Hero 3 (A game often using "Mainstream" songs and artists) and 2) I just got back from a hockey game, and they used Through The Fire And Flames, which would suggest that it is Uber Cuber (talk) 03:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I think they could because they release the same song over and over again and people still buy it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.240.123 (talk) 16:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

This is not a section to talk about you not liking them, that's what forums are for. But would anyone else be willing to put their beliefs into this? And I don't mean criticism of them, but whether or not you think they're mainstream or not.Uber Cuber (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I will put my beliefs into this. Me and my cousin have been faithful fans of Dragonforce for years, and after Guitar hero III came out, he was wearing a Dragonforce shirt and a small child came up to him and asked him if he could "beat that song on expert." i was outraged.the juggreserection ^IstKrieg! 16:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I feel your pain my friend,one time i was sitting in class and a redneck that sat beside my started trying to sing my curse by killswitch engage(3rd favourite band),he tried to scream it to:(.Just because something pops up on guitar hero 3 doesnt make it mainstream,killswitch engage isnt really all that mainstream,sure they've had a few hit songs,like the arms of sorrow,holy diver,and my curse,but besides those few songs,there other stuff sounds nothing like something that a mainstream junkee would listen too.But calling dragonforce mainstream is going over the line,although i am not a fan of df,nor do i have any love for them,i haven't really heard any of their songs played on the radio,nor played on fuse,and i've only heard one song played on sirius,and i think it was fury of the storm on the sirius hard rock channel.Just remember that the makers of guitar hero usually look for music with good guitar riffs and solos,and not necessarily anything that happens to pop up on a music channel.Like for example,Laid to Rest,by Lamb of God,was on guitar hero 2,lamb of god is anything but mainstream.4.235.186.185 (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

All the bands you just mentioned are mainstream, at least for rock standards. Not to mention all the bands you just mentioned are crappy bands that pretend to be metal (except maybe Dragonforce...they are metal but really weak). Anyways, yeah Dragonforce is mainstream as far as rock standards go right now. They're not completely mainstream as in pop and rap (as those are the two genres MOST in the mainstream right now) but they are plenty mainstream for rock fans. It pisses me off how many people like those lame bands (except Dragonforce...they're ok). Mainstream. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I think they're mainstream. I mean, after the release of Guitar Hero III almost everyone at my school started talking about them non-stop. I mean, come on, they used to be one of my top 4 favorite bands but, and I mean no offense by this, guitar hero, in some weird way, kinda got me burnt out of them. But yeah, without a doubt, they're mainstream. Oh, and about the guitar hero thing, don't get me wrong I love the game, but I do agree with Uber Cuber, I was just just playing it today and thinking about how most (if not all) of the bands and songs on guitar hero are mainstream. Emo777 (talk) 08:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Inability to nail it Live

I have heard that DragonForce's music is so technical and so absurdly fast that they have a very hard time making it sound right live. Assuming a source exists and this is actually true, would it be worth adding? I cannot confirm or deny my statement, I have no source, but it seems plausible. I just wanted to throw this one out there. Dachande (talk) 13:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Yawn. C'mon, take a chill pill and stop being so stuck up, folks, keeping score of every missed note is far more ridiculous than DragonForce and its most ardent fanboys (no, I'm not one of them, I just think the band is cool) could ever be. Whether fanboy or hater, you're obsessing about the band either way, why do you think your elitist bashing is healthier? That form of nitpicking is power nerd behaviour.

BTW, does the Alexi Laiho article have such a section? I've seen many people (fans, that is, even) complain about his supposedly degrading live skills lately. Or, for that matter, does the Anette Olzon article have a section "Inability to nail it live or in the studio"? (Sorry, couldn't resist.) Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's a matter of being stuck up...if a band can't reproduce their own music outside of a studio, it's kinda a big deal. Now, I'm by no means a NPOV source...but if you watch the videos of them performing live, you'll see where I'm coming from. I love how they sound on CD, but they really are incapable of playing their own songs the way they're played in house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.198.241.67 (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely right. They stumble all over their instruments live, not only missing notes, but playing the wrong ones. The tempo of the music is extremely diminished, and it's absolutely nothing like the studio "recordings", which are edited to hell. I don't see how you'd be able to get a NPOV source for this, but it is indeed quite true. 71.162.7.14 (talk) 19:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if you guys have ever played the guitar ... do you really think a guitarist should play exactly the same solo at every show ? And whil their sound is kind of muddy, the guitarists are accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.9.128.26 (talk) 22:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Bad Sound Live

DragonForce is one of the best bands I've ever heard... in the studeo! I've watched like a few of they're videos on youtube right? I also have a DVD of them live (Inhuman Rampage: Special Edition) and although they sound great on their ablums they sound terrible live. I heard someone say that if they could do it in the studeo they could do it live, not true. In the studeo all they have to do is record then they can push a few buttons and their terrible sound turns great. As far as actually playing, they aren't all that great. Don't get me wrong, I love their ablums, but would I got pay $100.00 for a ticket to see them live... No. It was dissappointing, they sounded so good on the CD, The Intro to through the Fire and Flames was so epic in the ablum. I couldn't hear it when they played live. And they're guitars made the most off key sounds I've ever heard in a band. It was dissappointing, say what you want, they just don't cut it live.Emo777 (talk) 07:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Its well known that dragonforce have so fast guitar solos in their latest album that usually the live performances doesn't mach exaclty the album. But there are bands who uses multiple vocals that obviously can't be played live (namely Blind Guardian) and no one ever complainted about it. The so-called "terrible" sound of dragonforce live isn't a encyclopedic content and so this entire section turns to be pointless. Haxxiy (talk) 21:15, 14 June 2008 (U

I was making a point, I don't see how the section (above this one somewhere) telling how great Dragonforce is and how they can mimic they're sound live has any point to it either. Besides, personally I think that someone needs to put in how they're not able to mimic they're sound live in the article. It was because of the article telling how they're known for they're face paced twin guitar solos, and they're epic playing style that was one of the reasons I was dissapointed that they couldn't produce it live. I figured if wikipedia said they were good they would be. The article doesn't state that fact about them and it is misleading. Emo777 (talk) 05:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

But actually the live sound of dragonforce isn't all that bad. The problem is that people go to their shows expecting the same clean and synthetised sound (to the point of purposedly ressembling videogame sounds) of the album. 189.26.82.134 (talk) 17:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

That's why I think we need to meantion it in the articale, I expected them to be able to reproduce their sounds live, but they could only do one or two parts. Plus at the concert I seen they did hit the wrong and off key notes at times. Plus the singer sounded better in the albums. It's just hard to enjoy them when you can't help but compare them to the albums.Emo777 (talk) 06:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I haven't seen them live, but I have a simple theory. In a studio, they can enhance their sound with synthesizers (duh) giving the fans ludicrously high expectations for the live shows. They are talented, but not inhumanly talented, they just use twin guitar solos. But fans act like editing your music is cheating or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.22.6 (talk) 01:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

"giving the fans ludicrously high expectations for the live shows" Hahaha more like giving the haters high expectations. 87.97.119.108 (talk) 18:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know, it's just my 2 cents. I think that if a band can't play or reproduce they're sounds live then why edit them onto the album. I know not every band sounds the same live as they do on the album, but Dragonforce sounds almost like a totally different band live. I don't feel cheated, i'm just disappointed, I mean, making all the video game sounds is one of the things they are most popular for (That and playing really fast). So if they can't produce them, or sound totally great live, then they need to work on it. Emo777 (talk) 07:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Uh...I saw them live in Montreal and they sounded almost exactly as good as on the albums, so I don't know what the hell you're going on about. They even nailed the solo from TTFaF, so something doesn't hold up here. Likely the sound system was on its "off" days...here's what I suggest: wear earplugs whenever you go to a Metal gig. It drowns out the bass which is usually turned way too high, that way you can actually hear the melody and singing. Peace. 70.29.238.158 (talk) 00:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Highly synthesized guitars?

Could it be metioned that they play guitars very synthesized compare to most other metal bands which can be high pitched but not that synthsized high if you know what I mean.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.177.252 (talk) 19:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The Discography

I've done a major edit on the DragonForce discography, from stub to FLC, comments would be appreciated. If all goes well it could be a one-edit-stub-to-featured-wonder. — Balthazar ^(T|C) 02:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

David Mackintosh

For some reason, David Mackintosh redirects here instead of to Dave's own article. Could someone fix that? 74.65.42.5 (talk) 05:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what's up with that, Underoath's page does that same thing, strange. Emo777 (talk) 20:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, gee, this isn't pov at all

"and their apparent inability to actually play their instruments, hence their heavy reliance on the latest computer technology. " —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.22.6 (talk) 01:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Section removed after vandalism

I removed this section until somebody can put it back to how it should be;

.DragonForce's influences are drawn from various kinds of shit such as nonmelodic styles of crap, and in particular video games such as Wonder Boy in Superman, and the finger yourself series, with lyrics comparable to themes present in fantasy games. Also, on some tour dates the band has actually come onstage to the Donkey Dick Theme. (I sauack and cant spell)

Vandalism

I strongly that someone keep watch over this page. There's been lot of animosity towards DragonForce, and this article just recently became a victim of vandalism. Thanks. - _{Frostmourne 16 (talk) 08:58, 20 December 2008 (UTC)}

Yup, I noticed. I'm keeping it on my watchlist as part of my normal RC Patrol. I'll do my best to keep it in check.--Melmann^(talk) 09:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm also keeping it on my watchlist. Pitty people come here to do this. Victor Lopes (talk) 15:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

By the way, there has been an ongoing reverting war at ZP Theart. He still has not enough notability to have his own article, so the link is a redirect to DragonForce. However, an IP user has been restoring his page. We should keep an eye on that article too. Victor Lopes (talk) 02:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The article is now semi-protected. Someone should remove the link to ZP Theart on the DragonForce page until he finally gets his own page. (When? I dunno.) Or probably it can be integrated into the page somehow.--116.12.228.194 (talk) 05:13, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

The Whole "overly Studio edited songs" myth

I was reading the Nov. 08 Guitar World magazine, which interviews Sam Totman and Herman Li, I found out that the whole rumor that they heavily use studio fx is proven a lie in the very first two sentences of the article. "Anyone who has eve wondered how Dragonforce pull off the jaw-dropping solos, symphonic harmonies and machine-like rythms on their album might be disappointed to discover that there are no secret weapons or tricky studio fx.." the studio is in Li's home, and is "downright humble." (GW nov) —Preceding unsigned comment added by IbanezGioGSZ120 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

just FYI - RIP Robotnikforce

With no Criticism section, I don't expect Dragonforce fanboy to listen to this, but I can still throw my 2 cents in the discussion page, nope ? First, I never listened to Dragonforce more than 1 minute and don't care/know about how good/bad, poser/not-poser they are. Ok ?

I just wanted to tell you that DragonForce is responsible of the death of the Robotnikforce video (some kind of YouTubePoop video), because we could hear the song "Through the Fire and Flames". Needless to say that tons of other videos contain the song "Through the Fire and Flames", that the song was downloadable on the official website, that the song is in GuitarHero, is the most played on Audiosurg, is available on all P2P network, etc...

One thing that went me "Wtf ?!" is the fact that the (now dead) video was something we can the call the "art of the web 3.0" and would have get less than 30k views (50k if lucky) - I could get more view with a 15 sec videos of me setting an US flag on fire with my fart -, it was not something we could call "mainstream", it wouldn't "kill the music industry". Needless to say (again), this video will be back on other website, downloadable elsewhere, ... standart procedure. --90.60.152.110 (talk) 20:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd venture the guess that the BAND had nothing to do with the video being taken down. Labels do that kind of thing. Most bands (~most~, I'm looking at you, Lars) don't really care about that kind of thing. Kingoomieiii (talk) 16:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Article used to be more extensive

Back when wikipedia used to be run more professionally, this article was kept in good shape and had more information to it, such as a section about the band's musical style. Some cunt keeps removing it. I try to put it back, but it gets removed again. All you people who find great satisfaction in patrolling wikipedia articles, I wonder if you can put your pants on and keep this here article from having sections removed suddenly without doing anything about it. 70.29.238.158 (talk) 00:15, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Apparently, this section was lost in this edit and was never added back. I don't see anything wrong with it, but I'll wait for other editors' opinions on whether or not we should add it back. Oh, and be careful with your words, I mean, just don't go calling helpful editors "cunts". And Wikipedia never stops running professionally, even when we users have to fight a war on vandals, like we've been doing in this article. Victor Lopes (talk) 00:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Me again. It's not the helpful editors who are cunts. It's the vandals who are cunts. Of course, I know I shouldn't use such language, as I'm demeaning the cunt by associating it with such people. :) 70.29.238.158 (talk) 03:24, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Yep, there was a second interpretation of your sentence I didn't get when I first read your post. Anyway, I prefer to keep a cool head even with vandals, because there's always the possibility of a helpful user to come out of a vandal. Anyway, I'm raising a small discussion on this issue down here. Victor Lopes (talk) 03:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

"Musical style" section

As discussed above, the "Musical style" section was removed in the middle of all those vandal edits and nobody added it back permanently. Therefore I ask: should we add it back? I mean, if it wasn't added back until now it must be because someone didn't find it appropriate. Or we simply didn't noticed it was missing, but anyway...in my opinion, it is an important section, considering that their sound is quite unique. Victor Lopes (talk) 03:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, as no one objects, I'm adding the section again. Victor Lopes (talk) 23:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection for 3 months

I managed to get this article semi-protected for three months, starting right now. It means that IP vandals are now unable to edit (or in other words, vandalize) DragonForce article. However, users who created their accounts to make vandal edits only are still free to edit, so let's keep an eye open. Now that we will have less unhelpful edits, maybe it's time to get this article improved, like the discussion I raised above. Victor Lopes (talk) 20:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

ZP Theart

when i click this person in the article in get redirected back to this same article, its weird and either wrong or useless —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.152.140.28 (talk) 10:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

As you said, the page has been redirected. It was was done because ZP Theart doesn't assert notability. I just removed the links on this page. Victor Lopes (talk) 18:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Music Style?

It describes the vocals rather awkwardly as "high pitched style vocal melodies". The term is 'falsetto'. The vocalist signs with a falsetto voice or register, if you want to get really technical. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsetto —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.108.93.159 (talk) 02:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

As it would appear, by the commonly accepted definition of falsetto, which is the highest male register, falsetto is light and lower in volume. The power behind the vocals insists that Theart is utilizing his mixed voice, not his falsetto.

DragonForce Associated Acts

{{editsemiprotected}} Can someone please add Bal-Sagoth to the Associated Acts bit? Dave Mackintosh has served as drummer for both bands. Thanks Lacheron09 (talk) 07:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

It's been done. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 21:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Already done fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 08:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thoughts about the article

It's pretty good, includes more information than the previous versions but is false at some points. For example there's no music video for My Spirit Will Go On. Secondly, the second paragraph of the Inhuman Rampage section is only slightly true. You can read about that show in the Ultimate Guitar interview with Herman Li. 91.82.176.240 (talk) 21:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Dragonforce aren't power metal they are speed metal

Listen to "Joe stump - Speed metal messiah" or "Helloween - I want out" and you'll hear what most people at the time regarded and defined as "Speed Metal".

It is that clean and crisp sound that had extra fast and riffing and solos. Then listen to Dragonforce and you'll hear it is the same.

Power metal was Judas Priest's 'Ram it Down' and 'Painkiller' albums or Pantera's 'Power Metal' album. Find me one source from during this era that ever defined Helloween as power metal?? Helloween were always speed metal and Judas Priest ('Ram it Down' and onwards) were power metal.

Speed metal was about "speed" and power metal was about "power!". How hard can it be??!!

Joe stump - Speed metal messiah confirms basically the attitude and speed behind "speed metal" (along with the same riffing style by groups such as Helloween (Dragonforce are no different just a later addition). Sonata Arctica when they first came out always called themselves as "speed metal". Again this coincides with that same guitar sound.

To go even further then groups such as Helloween (on later albums) and newer groups such as Sonata Arctica are Melodic Speed metal. Check both their official websites and both give reference to being "melodic" metal.

Metalosaurus (talk) 17:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Sonata Arctica, Labyrinth, Stratovarius and other bands are normally defined as power metal bands. Helloween and Stratovarius were defined as speed metal in their early careers, when they didn't sound like DragonForce sounds nowadays. Check Sonata's version of I Want Out, or newer songs by Stratovarius, and you can see hey sound close to DragonForce. You say that Sonata define themselves as speed metal. Well, DragonForce define themselves as "extreme power metal". Speed metal is not only about speed. Is there any reference out there defining DragonForce as speed metal? Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 18:14, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Guys, look at your own article on Power Metal. It's as if someone listened to the DragonForce discography and wrote an article about it. If there's any issue here, it's that the genres themselves can sometimes be confused, not that the songs walk the line between the genres.

Live album confirmation

Some recent news should be added on this page. DragonForce confirmed through their official Facebook page that they are going to release a live album. They didn't confirmated if it's gonna be only a live album, live DVD or both.

Sources:

http://www.facebook.com/dragonforce

http://www.facebook.com/dragonforce/posts/115688011781503

Sounds really laconic, and this isn't a news site. Maybe add it later when it's really been announced, with a title and everything. ×××BrightBlackHeaven^(talk)××× 05:29, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

http://www.dragonforce.com/2010/06/22/dragonforce-confirm-first-live-album-%e2%80%98twilight-dementia%e2%80%99-for-september-13th-2010-release/. Now it's oficial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.190.123.172 (talk) 14:35, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Archiving?

Shouldn't we request the archiving of this page? There are a couple of bots that can do it automatically over certain periods of time. This page has become quite to large to navigate, and besides, there are too many trivial discussions here. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 22:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Controversity Section

Somebody totally messed up the "Controversity" section on this page. Since I do not really know anything about editing in Wikipedia I would like to ask if anyone could change that.

Thanks a lot! --84.175.108.189 (talk) 20:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC)