5,580
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 161:
Line 161: +
Talk:Heavy metal music (view source)
Revision as of 21:10, February 7, 2008
, 21:10, February 7, 2008→Article poses as unbiased.
I would never expect a true conservative website to be so pro-heavy metal but here we are. The criticism section is laughable because it contains no real criticism at all whatsoever. I took the time to examine previous versions of the article and noticed that there were indeed previous examples of valid criticism, but they were removed by user [[User:Walker|Walker]]. I also noticed that a vast majority of his contributions involve removing criticism from articles of his Heavy Metal heroes. I believe this article should be revamped with some input from people who are willing to voice valid criticisms of the genre. - [[User:Osayat3|Osayat3]]
I would never expect a true conservative website to be so pro-heavy metal but here we are. The criticism section is laughable because it contains no real criticism at all whatsoever. I took the time to examine previous versions of the article and noticed that there were indeed previous examples of valid criticism, but they were removed by user [[User:Walker|Walker]]. I also noticed that a vast majority of his contributions involve removing criticism from articles of his Heavy Metal heroes. I believe this article should be revamped with some input from people who are willing to voice valid criticisms of the genre. - [[User:Osayat3|Osayat3]]
:Please look at the reason for removing the criticism section before blindly adding it back in yourself (along with removing someone else's unrelated work). Most, if not all, of the references are junk; one actually leads you to a site where you can buy a "research paper" about heavy metal music. Plagiarism sites are not valid citations. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 16:10, 7 February 2008 (EST)