I haven't seen a thread on this so let's see your views after you read it... looks pretty accurate imo:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_metal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_metal
Accurate about Black Metal? What do you think?
- Thread starter Unfaithfully Metalhead
- Start date
Yeah you really contribute alot lol Reason I posted it is because alot of people consider Wikipedia inaccurate on alot of the subjects they write on... So wanted to see if those same people or just people in general think this is inaccurate in terms of Black Metal... .
Zephyrus
Tyrants and Slaves
Alongside Death
On The Descent To Hell
- Oct 9, 2005
- 2,018
- 5
- 38
Neither did I Maggot... but in other subjects that I read about in the Wikipedia of which I know alot (I read alot of books on the Mafia/Mob) they are sometimes inaccurate with some facts. I don't think they double check their facts sometimes but thats probably because that site is astronomical and their resources are limited at the present time since they are basically free site and the people who write in wikipedia are not paid. I think they have about 1,000 active "editors"...
False Dawn
Member
There are always going to be people who add incorrect info here and there, but overall I think Wikipedia is a very accurate site.
Alongside Death
On The Descent To Hell
- Oct 9, 2005
- 2,018
- 5
- 38
I know what you mean. When I have been studying on my history class I was warned about the wikipedias flaws, but everything seems to be right. At least I was never misguided by wikipedia.
Life Sucks
and then you die
It's accurate. Anyone can contribute to Wikipedia, and that article was no doubt written by someone who is into and knows black metal.
Wires & Waves
New Metal Member
- Feb 4, 2006
- 2,258
- 27
- 0
unknown
fuck ftagn
I see someone is still in PMS mode because i criticized her Metal worthiness
ever hear the saying... fuck off & die? .. btw no one is telling you to read or post on any thread you do not like... the others do not seem to mind my threads as long as they are revelant to this forum..
why not Akercocke? I know some peeps aren't big fans of theirs but they are revelant in BM... but Life Sucks is correct... whomever wrote that piece on BM seems to be a true BM fan...
Hubster
...
I think the article is reasonably accurate. The only majorly questionable part is about ideology, but of course, that is the most hotly debated topic about Black Metal these days, so it's actually good that that section is questionable.
Well, Akercocke isn't a black metal band, for the most part they are a death metal band.
I haven't really listened to them though I plan to get a album or two of theirs that are on my buying list but I have never heard them be described as DM on this forum. <shrugs>
MasterOLightning
Optimator
Words That Go Unspoken, Deeds That Go Undone was a great album by Akercocke. It's pretty far removed from black metal though. It's more like progressive death/black metal. It is unlike blackened death in that it's not a hybrid, but rather distinct death metal and black metal segments within the songs. I guess it's notable in that sense.
Hatebreeder
Pizzicato Heartstrings
I agree; Wikipedia gets too much shit from people. The only ones who insult it, though, are people who have never used it or use it infrequently. I trust the articles on important topics to be pretty accurate.
The articles now are usually pretty accurate, but a few years ago they weren't and quite often filled with false or ignorant and unreliable information (and so thats why it receives so much criticism). The fact that literally anyone can submit or change information will always raise some doubt, but I use Wiki quite a bit.
Similar threads
