Talk:Cryptic Writings

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cryptic Writings article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Cryptic Writings has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 14, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed
May 15, 2019	Good topic candidate	Promoted
February 8, 2023	Good topic removal candidate	Demoted

Current status: Good article

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Metal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal articles

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Anarchy in the U.K.#Megadeth cover|Anarchy in the U.K.]] The anchor (#Megadeth cover) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Sources

Sources for the opinions of Mustaine and other artists are missing in the article

Why?

Why is thrash metal listed. This album is a hard rock/heavy metal album. There isn't enough thrash on it to justify adding it to the infobox. 217.40.128.181 (talk) 22:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Disintegrators and She-Wolf. Those are major songs from this era that aren't melodic like these others. And there you go again with the whole "heavy metal is hard rock". They're two different things. Very much so. -MetalKommandant (talk) 11:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And yet Wiki Libs adds his opinion with no source... -MetalKommandant (talk) 01:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, I've never added anything to this article. I have reverted a single user who has used numerous IP socks to try and remove content. If you review the edit history of the article it is a clear that this content has been added to the article by no less than 15 unrelated editors (both logged-in and anonymous). A check-user for the origins of these different contributors show they originate from the UK, Europe, the US, New Zealand, Australia andsouthern Asia. More than enough weight to verify the validity of the added content. Only 1 single purpose account (and his IP socks) have ever complained and deleted the content because it goes against their own personal opinion. And these types of edits will always be reverted until that editor can provide a reliable source that outweighs the consensus and proves that the content should be removed. The Real Libs-speak politely 12:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I never added anything either. I was just reverting the information back to what it was before they started this edit war. Also, I really don't know where you're getting this sockpuppeting. Unless I've been hacked, I have never logged into any of these IPs you're accusing of sockpuppeting. "These types of edits." You mean your unsourced majority? Multiple IPs coming by and saying "Megadeth is tr00 hard rock 'cause they sound like it. Kthxbai." and never logging in again? Gee, sounds now that sounds like sockpuppeting to me. And apparently explaining is "b**ching". Well, I think you're just annoyed because I haven't succumbed to your intimidation yet. Like I've said, this place isn't supposed to be a mob. Quantity is not quality, I'm afraid. -MetalKommandant (talk) 01:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FFF is also a thrash metal song and Vortex is something between heavy metal and thrash metal. 88.192.104.142 (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Edit

"Even though this album is similar in style to Countdown to Extinction and Youthanasia, it is currently still the last Megadeth album to go platinum."

Is it me, or does this sentence make no sense? This should either be split into two sentences, or one half of it should be deleted. Just wanted to check before I went ahead and did something about it. 24.91.115.238 (talk) 01:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   I agree; that makes no sense. I was about to make an almost identical comment.
   75.131.252.72 (talk) 22:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

can't access the rest of the album discography

WTF

When I try to keep going to get more albums after this one by clicking on the Discography on the side of the page, it always Re-Directs me to the Live Traxx album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.44.204 (talk) 06:37, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vic Rattlehead on CW

"This is the first and so far only album where Vic Rattlehead does not appear at all in any tangible form,"

This is false, there is an abstract painting of Vic in the original album's CD booklet. However it only appears partially in the remaster. It is not a smudge or whatever the writer of this article thought that it was. It was there for a reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.124.190 (talk) 22:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New article

I must say that I'm pretty surprised when I found out that She-Wolf doesn't have it's own article. Can someone please make an appropriate page about this wonderful song? And don't tell me that this song wasn't released as a single, because it's the best on this CD, worldwide recognized as a heavy metal masterpiece and played in literally every Megadeth live show.--95.156.10.43 (talk) 19:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2002 remaster

shouldnt there be some mention of how poorly recieved the 2002 remastered/reperformed versions were? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.39.24 (talk) 23:18, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cryptic Writings/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tomica (talk · contribs) 10:25, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are no disambiguation links or dead references. Good!

Infobox

Everything's good. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 12:07, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Looks great. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 12:07, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, since I read the whole article, I decided to pass it. I copy-edited some parts, and I think that the prose now is GA acceptable. Cheers! — Tomíca^(T2ME) 09:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cryptic Writings. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/megadeth/albums/album/258853/review/5946247/cryptic_writings

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cryptic Writings. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]