Enzigel edit #1 - Singing. Glenn is known for his powerful vocals. That's the fact. I can't help if this looks too positive for you G.g. but that's the one thing that made him famous, and it's in every single article mentioning his voice. I can't edit out fact that famous skater skates well just because you think no positive info is allowed. Your current edit doesn't make sense, he is NOT known JUST for his crooning, he is not Sinatra for god sake, he is punk/metal singer, and his croons are very prominent on couple of albums only.You changed original users text from his "crooning resembles mix of elvis, orbison,morrison" into "he borrows from mix". I don't consider that a good faith edit.Enzigel20:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To me, the mechanics in the singer section were good, but I can see G.g.'s redundancy point that he makes below. Why did you drop the graph about musical genres? CQJ18:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
G.g. edit #1 - Starting the paragraph with "As a singer" is redundant as the sentence itself is referring to his singing and vocal style. At the same time, you're right in saying Glenn himself is not Sinatra. So, a little re-organizing of the opening three paragraphs corrects this. As for the use of "borrows from", that is not incorrect either. CQJ explained something that said that not all information needs citations due to it being informally or colloquially accepted. Therefore, Glenn's vocal style is actually known to borrow from Elvis Presely and Jim Morrison - by most observers. Hence the 'Evil Elvis' or 'Morrison manque' labelled on Glenn. There was an interview Glenn Danzig did for a magazine in the early 90's, if I can find it I will source it in the article, where he is asked directly about all this and he says something like..."well, i'm not the big elvis fan, eerie von is, but yes elvis's sun album was influential, as for Morrison, yes I can see how people would see that, but you know i think i scream more like howling wolf". But, I removed the "borrows from" and replaced it with "reminiscent of" and placed the whole sentence in the trivia section. As you correctly point out, he is not Sinatra, or known for his singing, so opening paragraphs is the incorrect place to refer to his vocal style. I will link/reference the interview where Glenn talks about his vocal style once I can locate it.G.g. 02:27, 20 August 2006
I don't consider this a good faith edit at all, you just removed whole section about him from the introduction and offended one edit at a time agreement... As for a "as a singer intro" it is needed because I am attempting to insert the "as an author" info, dealing with his songwriting and comic-book publishing part of career, but I was considerate enough not to make multiple edits at a time.I never said his not know for a singing, I explicitely stated that he is not known for his crooning style only (the first version after your edits made it appear so), and moving this to trivia section I consider an act of ill will...so...Enzigel09:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, perhaps G.g. considered your reversion below not such a good faith effort, so, that's a relative term :-). If the reference for the interview could be found, that would be excellent. As to removing an introduction term, well....I'll put that in the compromise section or we can work that out next. Personally, I don't see the difference where it is in the article, as long as it's in the article. But if Danzig is a renaissance man, it could go in either place. You do have a point with your 'as a singer' versus 'as a writer' contrast, however, let's not introduce the verbage until there's a singer and a writer in the section. Good work so far. CQJ18:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Enzigel edit #2 Revert. Please don't work on multiple topics at the time. If we're discussing singing, let's discuss it untill solution, no need to change any other data until it's turn. Please keep the good faith, I don't do this to annoy you, but you ain't making it easy for me by not discussing it ONE thing at the time. Let's deal JUST with the singing line this time, please. Here's what I understanded as your intentions about this particular line - 1) remove reference to his vocals - I don't like it, it is not objective thing to do, and his distinctive singing has never been disputed even by the haters. But if you insist claiming that you perceive it as too positive(?), ok, let's remove it. 2)Cites on elvis and co. - I personaly don't need any cites, as I have most of the interviews. I don't think it is disputed by anyone but the most ignorant either, so we can let that go too. 3) "borrows" statement, I don't like it, thanks for considering it's removal. 4)Whole line meaning. I don't agree with any edit that would leave line like "His vocal style is reminiscent of Elvis Presley, Jim Morrison and Howling Wolf." as this is not true. Maybe his "crooning is"... and you could slap evil elvis tag here like it was in a original text. So please let us do it constructive way...Enzigel09:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It would appear that the singing part is going to be really sticky. So in those circumstances, we need to go back to sourcing and not just what people think or what people perceive. So, let's hold off on the moving or inserting more information and stick with the singer section for a moment. I'll go grab it and be right back. CQJ18:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, what is the part of the current line that needs quotations? As for the "evil" part G.g. wanted to mention, my original intention was to insert this in "As an author" line that would follow, explaining his obsession with horror, gore and religious themes, mentioning the contraversy reactions in public, and ending with the horror rock stuff somebody added...I won't add anything else right now, until I understand what you want me to source. His distinctive way of singing isn't very much disputed, and is in almost any article mentioning singing from misfits day on. I already sourced it with two quotes, but I can see why leaving them in would disrupt the balance. Other parts doesn't seem disputed,so... I'll just source this first tell me if any of the other parts need it...Enzigel07:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Enzigel edit #3 Ok. 1)Fixing my mistake (thanks CQJ for pointing that out). 2) Adding three new references for a voice (two are from Danzig and one from Misfits era, don't have my Samhain stuff here by me, I can post that later if needed) 3)Changes to singing line. 4) Slapping author line there for a reference, delete if it's not time to include it yet. Enzigel08:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I like what you've done, Enzigel. Very much so. May I make some slight re-wording and/or re-organizing changes to your latest edit purely as a way to propose changes? Because it would take too long to explain here. But just slight changes. Let me know if you're ok with this before I make any edits. G.g.11:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
G.g. edit #2 - Just a mere re-organizing of what was already written, just to make it roll along better, grouping key points made into cohesive sentences/paragraphs. Also, just a few minor word replacements and grammatical changes to what was already written. No changes to the good work Enzigel did in his previous edit. A good faith edit by me. I did add a word or two, but just because "powerful" alone isn't enough description for his singing, as he also has a very broad vocal range too. Hence the use of the word "broad". Also, instead of using "satanism", I think the word "occult" suffices as a generic description for this. Anyway, I hope you both like this edit, enough to move on to next topic.....speed along the process to have the main article unprotected and go 'live'. Later, we can quickly revisit anything before completely agreeing. Faithfully yours. G.g.16:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Enzigel edit #4 Few things about intro section. I think publishing company would be more appropriate as it publishes many comic books by many authors. Also I think term author or something would be better than the writer as it wouldn't suggest him writing a literature, and would include videos, illustrations and comics. Just two terms, no big deal.Enzigel21:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy with your use of "publishing company" and your explanation for "author". I agree with both. I am happy with this edit. Hope you are completely happy too. Shall we move on to "early years" now, Enzigel? Please proceed with your edit of "early years". G.g.23:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
G.g. edit #3 - I just re-arranged the sentence about his father to make it flow on a bit better. But I feel this "early years" section is looking bare. Would be good to fill it up with a bit more information. Interesting, relevant. If you know more about his early life, family life, by all means add it in. I guess just avoid any irrelevant stuff like him losing his virginity etc. But for sure, this section needs more info. G.g.23:15, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Enzigel edit #5 - Put back one original line and corrected it a bit, this is info that is verifiable, as for the rest, as CQJ likes to say - I'm not touching this with a ten foot pole :) Edit as you like.Enzigel00:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
G.g. edit #4 - Added in "aspiring to become a comic book writer and/or photographer" to make the sentence a bit fuller and relevant to all the mention of horror, comics, etc. But, if this info is false, then edit out as you see fit. Otherwise, Enzigel, please move on to next section and make your opening edit. G.g.00:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Enzigel edit #6 - The end of Misfits: My experience tells me this will be a big problem. I'm not sure what I could do about it? I checked your last edit and you quoted official misfits time-line. This is not official time-line, it is outdated version of mark-kennedys misfits timeline. Mark is a great collector, at the time strongly biased towards Jerry, think he got over it now :) No way he would EVER tell that misfits tried to continue, as this not true. His own site reffers to Jerrys band as misfits95 or misfits(tm) making strong distinction with original. As for lawsuit I already talked about that, the info you read about start of a lawsuit 2 years before 1988 is wrong and probably corrected in newer version. The 1988 (5 years after the misfits end) lawsuit was for money not for the right to perform, Caiafa bros had a band after the misfits, kryst the conqueror, and had their jobs with their fathers knife business, no misfits in their head till 94. Well, don't know, let's talk and see how we can work this out.Enzigel01:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on Enzigel # 6 - I don't think this will be a major problem, Enzigel. I concede that you know more than me, and trust your judgment here. However, I would like to mention something, perhaps you could let me know what you think, what you know, and maybe if it has any merit, how it could be included. Basically, forget Jerry Only and his motivations for a moment. My understanding (correct me) is that essentially there was a legal dispute between Glenn and the misfits - merchandise, yes, MAYBE as well their right to continue performing as "the misfits" and using songs penned by Glenn. Not sure, but I am positive I read this in an interview with John Christ. Anyway, somewhat similar to the Roger Waters vs Pink Floyd dispute that resulted in Pink Floyd being allowed to continue and perform songs penned by Roger Waters. I grant you that Jerry Only sought a cut of merchandise and had other ulterior motives. But ignoring that, essentially there was a legal dispute not just about merchandise but the other stuff. With them all settling out of court. Even if Glenn was in the right or wrong, ignore that for a second. The point of me originally mentioning all this was purely to lead into the next paragraphs in mentioning the reason why Samhain became "Danzig". I feel this point needs some explaining, and a little background. Obviously feeling burned by the Misfits fall-out, Glenn sought to never let this repeat again. He undertook the name change to protect the IP of his songs AS WELL AS contractually setting out the rights that the "Danzig" band would have to sales from merchandise etc. The end result being that they were all in agreement that Glenn would retain all IP rights, they'd get whatever share of profits, and that essentially they were more HIRED musicians than they were DANZIG. So, I do trust your judgment, but the mention is purely to establish the background a bit in order to explain the Samhain name-change, which, you might agree, wasn't purely about merchandise, but also IP rights for songs. If this is true, then it stands to reason that the dispute with the Misfits wasn't as cut and dry as JUST merchandise but their right to use his songs. Would have to be a little more to it than just merchandise. I mean, Glenn trying to stop Jerry with merchandise rights would have to somehow involve legal IP rights to the name "The Misfits" as well as songs authored by Glenn, surely. Make sense? Yes? No? Anyway, let me know how you feel, what you know, and we'll work together on getting it 100% right. G.g.02:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now we're treading on WP:V territory. Might I suggest, if you're in agreement with it, a quick refactoring to slim things down and a restatement of where we're going, so that other external parties can see what the thought pattern is at a glance? By the way, I'll wait for both of you to agree before I do anything like archiving or refactoring. You guys are doing a bang-up job, by the way! CQJ03:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with refactoring and archiving this medcab page as you see fit, CQJ. As for WP:V, well, I'll go on a hunt for reputable sources (John Christ interview) that may offer some insight into this issue. Bear with me, though. In the meantime, Enzigel, if you can find sources for somehow establishing the background in the Misfits/Glenn dispute that can establish Glenn's motives for the Samhain name change. I'm not really fussed what is said as long as some tie can be established between that and his later motives. By the way, I'm enjoying collobarating with Enzigel, feel we are on the same page, and we are being very well mediated by you, CQJ. Many thanks for your time and effort. G.g.03:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with archiving/refactoring, it's needed very much. As for the stuff we're talking about: Consider this 3 points G.g. REASON FOR LAWSUIT: As I said, you won't find any interview with jerry only from that time where he claims he wanted to continue misfits. That simply ain't true. I already mentioned that he and his brother returned to music in 1987 with Kryst the Conqueror, christian heavy metal band, aimed to counter glenn's satanical image. I found typed down version of 1990's Jersey Beat interview with Jerry, or Mocavious Kryst-Mo the Great as he called himself then, you might want to take a look here. They didn't sue for trademark, they sued for money, trademark is all glenn accepted to give them as a settlement. And you really can't compare situation with the Pink Floyd :) as Caiafa brothers had no input on songwriting, you might compare it to FooFighters calling themselves Nirvana :) NAME CHANGE: "Glenn decides to call his band danzig" thing. You'll notice that Jerrys lawsuit starts in 1988, Danzig was formed in 1987 so linking these two can't be right. Glenn repeatedly stated in numerous interviews that he called band "danzig" so he'll never have to change name again when he changes line-up. It's just marketing thing, legaly you can't protect yourself from paying loyalties to musicians by changing the name of the band. John Christ has the same legal rights to "Danzig" loyalties today as Jerry had for Misfits. As for the "MUSICAL ABILITIES" of Caiafa brothers, fact is Glenn whined about that a lot, fact is they really sucked live, to the point they didn't try to play at all. But I DON'T find this essesential, if you want to edit it out I don't mind, if you want me to find some quotes, I can, but wouldn't want to waste time if not necessary...Ok, that's from me now, I've probably missed to address some issues, so just point 'em out...Enzigel09:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok well make your edits to this sectionhow you see fit, and I'll just run a grammatical/re-organizing eye over it once you're done, we'll see if there's anything else we want to add in or take out, and then wrap that section up asap and move on to the next section. G.g.10:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Enzigel edit #7 Ok, things I've mentioned are the only things I had problem with. If "disbanded" and "abilities" terms offend you, I don't mind you writing that Misfits just broke up, I didn't write this in the first place, and I don't care what terminology is used. As for change into "Danzig" i think I've talked about that before, so... those are the edits I wanted to do...Enzigel11:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
G.g. edit # 5 - Just a few grammatical alterations. Section I feel is complete, thanks to Enzigel. Now time to move on to the next section. I would like you make your edits first, Enzigel. However, I am not really liking the section name of "trivia". The article just kind of trails off poorly finishing in point form. Propose a new section name, and instead of making point forms, try to use all the existing stuff there and other stuff you want to add, putting it into more of a sentence/paragraph structure. Once you do that, I will try to tie it all up, maybe add some kind of better way to conclude the article before all the references, external links, and discography are mentioned. Good work, Enzigel. Actually, before we move on, I also feel there's not a real lot mentioned about Danzig's albums. There's probably a few interesting things to mention about each of his 7 albums. Doesn't have to be in great detail, but a couple lines on each album describing the musical alterations, and other interesting information. Would you like to do this, Enzigel? Actually, what I'll do is write some commentary for each album, and then let you fix it up or add/delete from it.G.g.12:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As for the albums I don't mind any of the data written previously, and I can understand CQJ deleting it as every band has it's own page... Whatever. As For trivia I don't have to say much about this. I thought your addition about tattoos was interesting enough minus the height,hair and eyes info, and it is sourced. Besides that, I don't really care about looks and style of the page. As for trivia section itself - there were always trivia sections about glenn, as there were lots of info on b-movies and stuff that was referenced in the lyrics or album covers. Don't know if it's needed here in this article or not though, I'll leave that one to your artistic will, as long as the factual data is the same I don't have anything to say about article, already missed henry's show aired today, this wikipedia stuff sucks :) Enzigel12:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
G.g. Edit # 6 - Went right thru article up until the Trivia page adding tags around band names etc. Also put down short paragraph comments on each Danzig album. Hope this is ok. Let me know. Also, as for all this Wikipedia stuff. I'm sorry about that. But we are almost completely done now. If you're cool with it, I will go thru the Trivia section and fix it up a bit, and add in comment about his tattoos (minus the height, hair etc). Once I'm done, let me know if there's anything you want to change about the whole article. At that stage, the article should be totally complete and ready to go live pending CQJ's approval. I just want to quickly say here that I apologize for being nasty to you during the revert wars and instigating all this tedious mediation process with you, making you miss your favorite shows etc. However, I appreciate it too, because I have learnt to understand you better, to colloborate with you, and hopefully in future when we meet on the official Danzig page, we both now have a respectful appreciation of each others efforts. Will be more onside with each other as the 'live' Danzig page continues to evolve in time. Once again, many apologies, hope you can forgive me and accept me. G.g.13:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
G.g. edit # 7 - Not much to fix inside Trivia section, added some tags around band names, etc. Also included mention about his tattoos and provided source. Ok, this article is done now, pending approval from Enzigel and CQJ. The rest of the stuff (references, external links, and discography I guess are fine to stay as they are. No mediation required there. So, have a run thru, and let me know if there's anything else you want me to add/remove. G.g.14:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, CQJ, in this sandbox version, the page ends at "Singles". The live version had "soundtracks", "live versions", "official videography", "solo", "other", "Power and fury orchestra", and "external links" categories coming afterwards. So, if it's ok, when making the approved sandbox version go 'live' could you add in all those other categories too please? G.g.14:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
