Talk:Rocket from the Crypt

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Musicians B‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Low-importance).

Band name

The name of this group is too similar to the original name of the Dead Boys - Rocket from the Tombs - to be a coincidence IMO. Perhaps a future update or edit to the article could address this.208.32.173.71 16:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read the first paragraph of the "Band History" section, titled "Formation." They based the RFTC name on RFTT. --IllaZilla 20:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Band members

I removed the list of band members from the main text as the information appears twice in other parts of the article, firstly in the Infobox and then in a table of "Rocket from the Crypt lineups". I now see that my edit has been undone with the explanation that "the members list is useful as it provides more information about real names and instruments, etc. than the other sections. the purpose of the lineups table is to show a chronology of change & releases". I dispute this.

If you want to include real names then put them in the Infobox, and the instruments played already appear in the lineups table. I think having the same information in the article in various different places is clumsy and adds nothing to our knowledge of the band. Plus, having the table justified to the right and the band listing justified to the left in the same section just looks plain awful and makes the whole article so much harder to read.

I'm inclined to revert to my original edit but that seems a little petty. I'd much rather see what other users think before taking further action. So does anyone else have an opinion...? Kevin Boyd (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]