Talk:Iron Maiden

This article uses British english dialect and spelling. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Upheavel Section

I have seen interviews with Steve Harris that implies that guitarist Adrian Smith left by his own will, he was not booted, this error should be corrected and sited. 74.222.208.167 (talk) 04:19, 15 June 2008

Yeah, I agree completely - I hadn't noticed that statement before. I too was under the impression that he left due to lack of enthusiasm, rather than being let go for it. I'll look for a source when I get home and fix it, assuming we're correct. ~ mazca ^talk 07:59, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

From what I remember and gather, Adrian did leave to explore other projects. Just a look at some of the songs Adrian helped write ("Two Minutes to Midnight", "Wasted Years", "Stranger in a Strange Land") and you'll likely come to the conclusion that he was writing music meant for a single lead guitar. But I also seem to remember in ineterviews that he made the choice to leave. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 21:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

judas priest influences

http://members.firstinter.net/markster/POINTOFENTRY.html

Judas Priest preceded Iron Maiden by a few years in discography. The fact that they were a supporting act for Judas Priest so early in their carreer and they "borrowed" the leather image (among other things), too soon right after Judas Priest themselves launched it, I think constitutes a great influence for Iron Maiden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.140.93.157 (talk) 00:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Influences

The guy above makes a good point about Judas Priest being verifiably an influence for Iron Maiden. But the concern for me is on that whole sentence in the lead, which says they are influenced by "Thin Lizzy, UFO, Wishbone Ash, and Deep Purple". All of those seem pretty reasonable to me, sure. But the sentence is completely unsourced, and it seems to be defended pretty vigorously by the various people who watchlist this article. For example, when Judas Priest got added a few days ago it was just reverted without comment, but it was no more sourced (and no less reasonable) than the four acts already there. That sentence needs sources, or it needs to go - the lead section is not a place for original research. ~ mazca ^{t | c} 12:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Wishbone Ash is mentioned a lot in a tabs book I have I don't know how I could site it on here unfortunately, the other bands are all mentioned on the early days dvd but again I'm not sure on the proper technique for siting something that's not an electronic artical —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.201.143.208 (talk) 10:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! If nobody else gets to it, I'll look into citing those later myself. Could you tell me what the name of the tabs book you have is? ~ mazca ^{t | c} 12:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I was the one who added Wishbone Ash, I'm pretty certain. I distinctly remember seeking out that band after reading Harris claim them as an influence in at least one of my tab books. I'm pretty certain I read it on this tab book: http://www.amazon.com/Iron-Maiden-Guitar-Tab/dp/0769260195/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1218737579&sr=1-11 I might have thrown that book out, though...because as far as the accuracy of the tablature goes, it was pathetic (you can see my review from over four years ago saying as much). Ynot4tony2 (talk) 18:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I've cited both the things mentioned, if anyone sees a problem feel free to update, or just let me know. I'd love to see this article FA-quality again at some point and we need to sort out the sourcing if that's ever going to happen. :) ~ mazca ^{t | c} 20:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

The last.fm bio of UFO mentions Maiden thanking UFO on the liner notes of NoTB although I'm not sure if thats a credible source or not Link:http://www.last.fm/music/UFO/+wiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.61.127 (talk) 07:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

The NotB liner notes themselves are credible sources, since someone's works can be cited to support their opinions. Furthermore, seeing as how Iron Maiden has covered "Doctor Doctor" on one of their b-sides, I think it's pretty much undisputed that U.F.O. has influenced them.

And even though *I* am not a credible source, Maiden's last couple concerts have started off with U.F.O.'s version of "Doctor Doctor" playing through the P.A. shortly before the band takes the stage, and they've ended the last half dozen or so concerts (after the band's last encore) I've seen with "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" from the Monty Python movie "Life of Brian" (this is mentioned, but not sourced, on the Wikipedia page for the song). Should this warrant a mention? If so, can anyone find a credible source? Ynot4tony2 (talk) 12:42, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

In early interviews as well as official publications of the IMFC, Harris was explicitly citing Tull, Sabbath and Priest as his main influences. The others emerged much later. The reason it is getting deleted here is because there is an idiotic feud/competition between Priest and Maiden fans. The music is the same, but the fans have to hate each other - hey, if there's no reason to hate we'll make one up!!!!

RE the above two comments: covering someone's music is not the same as an influence. The reason UFO, Priest and Kiss are mentioned on the NoTB backsleeve is because Maiden supported those bands on tour. Influence means the muscic of the influencing band helped shape the influenced band's music in one way or another. A band can cover another band's music without necessarily being influenced by them. According to this reasoning, G'N'R were influenced by Bob Dylan? Priest by Joan Baez and Peter Green? Gimme a break. 65.51.22.212 (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

The UFO song covered sounds a bit like the style Maiden uses, and Maiden's version didn't deviate much from the UFO version.

Besides, you are simply assuming Dylan (or any number of bands that performed the very same song) didn't influence GnR, and that Baez/Green did not influence Priest. You have no basis for these assumptions. So no, you get no break. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 20:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm... I still cling to my break. Of course no can totally disprove the influence of some bands on others, but that's not the point. "Influence" in general means those bands that had a major, conscious role in shaping the influenced band's music. If you were to cite any and all influences, you'd probably have to cite 300 inluencing bands for every influenced bands. IMHO the best thing is to stick to Harris' own (and earliest) words: Tull, Sab, Priest. 65.51.22.212 (talk) 11:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem is, that's only a partial list. I've read were Harris has also cited Wishbone Ash, for instance. But yes, you're right...we should find words coming directly from the band members before making such a claim. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 12:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Up The Irons

Is it appropriate that a wikipedia search for "up the irons" redirects here even though there is NO MENTION WHATSOEVER of the phrase anywhere on the page? More than a minor oversight, IMHO... -70.251.98.176 (talk) 19:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

-Perhaps it should mentioned that it is a well know catchphrase among fans and the band themselves, as shown in the booklets with most of their albums. Iron-Mailer (talk) 23:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Good point! I added a paragraph under "Image and legacy". Ynot4tony2 (talk) 21:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Good addition. I briefly thought about adding it a few days ago but a good place for it in the article didn't stick out at me - where you put it looks good. Seen anything we can source it to, by the way? I'm sure there's several good ones, I just don't personally own any of the good books/DVDs that are useful for sourcing these things. ~ mazca ^{t | c} 22:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how we would source it. Since the phrase appears in the liner notes, we could potentially cite the discs/albums/tapes themselves for part of the addition. I'm struggling to find a legitimate source or even a discussion of the meaning/origin anywhere...I just find fans using it as a greeting or way or announcing they are a fan. But since the band certainly uses it, and frequently, this page should mention it even if we can't find a source outside the band. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 14:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

After a little digging, it seems that "The Irons" refers to West Ham United, a London Soccer club of which Harris is a big fan. A search of "Up the Irons" and "West Ham United" will give plenty of legitimate sources, but you'd have to dig a little deeper finding one tying the band to it all. It will be even more problematic finding sources to "prove" the fans' use of the slogan in reference to the band. I'll do a little more on this later, unless someone else does before then. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 14:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ed Force One

Surprised there is no mention that Bruce Dickinson has a commercial pilots licence and co-pilots the plane. Every flight uses the call sign "Bruce Air 666". 59.167.41.167 (talk) 11:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Normally there would be an argument that such a fact would belong on the Bruce Dickinson page and not here, but since the band (I'm pretty sure) travels on the plane for gigs (as I was lead to believe by video footage shown at their recent concert), it would be worth mentioning here. Do you have a good source for it? Feel free to add it. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 14:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

There is mention of it on the page, "The first leg of the tour consisted of 24 concerts in 21 cities, travelling over 50,000 miles in the band's own chartered plane "Ed Force One"", with reference 39 pointing to a pretty big page of information about ed force one here. A reference to Bruce's piloting might be a worthwhile addition, although I don't know whether it would be more suitable on his personal wikipedia page. Steve355 (talk) 23:09, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out to me. I think Bruce's piloting of the band's plane is worth a mention here and on Bruce's page. Assuming no major disputes, I say go ahead and add this factoid. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 13:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

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

I looked through the article, but it's got quite bit of work that needs to be done before it's at GA level.

1. Much of the article is still unsourced. It should be fully sourced in order to be promoted to GA.

   I've worked on this some but loads more sourcing is needed. Particularly, a lot of information is probably sourced from the various books listed in the references, and I don't personally have any of them - I'll have to leave this to someone who does. ~ mazca ^t|c

2. The article could use a good copyedit. The prose could be tightened up, but the bigger problems were unexplained statements (why did Sharon unplug the PA system? that whole paragraph is confusing) and short, choppy paragraphs.

Added some info to the Ozzfest incident, all of which is taken care of by the pre-existing citation.Ynot4tony2 (talk) 17:05, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

1. On the subject of the short paragraphs, they would benefit from added detail. Much of the article seems to be lacking in comprehensiveness (as a quick example, what is Ed Hunter?).

   Agree in principle, though I'm confused by your specific example - both the occasions that name is mentioned is in a sentence like "the computer game Ed Hunter". ~ mazca ^t|c

Sorry, I could have explained that better. I haven't heard of a band releasing a computer game before (although it has probably happened a few times). A quick explanation of what the game is would help, as it left me wondering what kind of game Iron Maiden would release. GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

1. Why is "poem of the same name" italicized?

    Done, no idea - fixed. ~ mazca ^t|c

2. The lead needs to be expanded. For an article of this length, it should be two-three well-sized paragraphs that summarize the entire article. Fixed
3. It would be nice if some more "official" reviews were included in the references rather than the questionable sites that are currently referenced.
4. Reference 3 is a wiki that should not be used as a reference.

    Done, removed - it was just duplicated information anyway. ~ mazca ^t|c

5. Many of the online references are missing important information. At minimum, they should have a title, url, publisher, and accessdate. If a date or author is given, that information should be included as well. The references should also be properly and consistently formatted — see Wikipedia:Citation templates for the {{cite web}} template.

    Done Everything that was missing this data now has it and I've generally used the {{cite web}} and {{cite book}} template more appropriately throughout the references. Your previous comment on the need for more sources still stands, but the ones we do have now look a lot more complete. ~ mazca ^t|c

6. Images should be staggered rather than all in a vertical column.
7. The pictures of "Dave Murray and Adrian Smith" and "Adrian Smith, Dave Murray, Janick Gers, Steve Harris" have outdated templates that do not give sufficient explanation of why they are public domain.
8. The clips in the "Audio" section do not have the detailed fair use rationales that are required. I think including them is unnecessary, however, so removing the section is probably better for copyright reasons.

   I've massively improved their fair-use rationales, as they were indeed poor. I disagree that they're unnecessary though, I consider them pretty well-chosen samples that educationally illustrate important aspects of the band's style and history. Based on other articles - specifically the FA-class article on Metallica, which has a similar number of samples for a similar purpose - I think they're perfectly within acceptable bounds of the non-free content criteria. ~ mazca ^t|c

This should give a good start. Please note that this is not a comprehensive list of what needs to be done, but this will get things moving. If this list can be completed within a week, I will post a more detailed review at that time. Any questions or comments can be left here, as I have added this page to my watchlist. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I had been thinking about GA-nominating this at some point but I didn't think it was anywhere near ready yet, mostly because of the sourcing issues you mention and the fact that no substantial improvements have been made to the article in a while - I'm surprised someone else has done so without mentioning it. Thanks for the initial review anyway, I've been planning to work on this article and I suppose now is as good a time as any. :) ~ mazca ^t|c 09:33, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Made quite a few changes, detailed up in response to your points above. ~ mazca ^t|c 13:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

It has been over a week, and there are still many serious problems with the article. I am failing the nomination, as it just isn't ready at this point. I hope my list can be of use and that references can be found. I also recommend submitting the article for peer review prior to its next nomination. Thanks for the responses, as that the article has definitely improved. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree. I don't think it should have been nominated in the first place yet, it was clearly not ready. Thanks for your assistance and to Ynot4tony/Be Black Hole Sun and anyone else that helped improve it this week. ~ mazca ^t|c 11:28, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Unnamed 15th album

I removed the mention from the discography. I'm under the impression that "discography" describes a band's body of work...and this would not include albums which do not exist yet.

I would go as far as to say that, as of now, the upcoming 15th album does not merit any mention on this page at all. Yes, I'm aware there is a mention on the official site about Bruce saying they are going into the studio after the tour. But until there is more information like a title, a solid release date, or samples/tracks available, all talk is purely speculation. It's potential release is just too far off to be treated as impending. Any thoughts? Ynot4tony2 (talk) 20:54, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I pretty much agree. I think there's also been an interview recently where Steve Harris confirmed that they are working on a new album, but again there's very little in the way of useful information to put in an article. ~ mazca ^t|c 21:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Is it possible to semi-protect the discography, and maybe the introduction? I don't want to discourage new users from editting other sections, but it's a bit annoying to track a page that's constantly barraged with the same two edits (album sales, "unnamed 15th album") from users who do not even bother to read the discussion and don't have the same interest in maintaining the page as other, more established users do. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 13:25, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately protection on an article is all or nothing - you can't semi-protect individual sections. I agree it's pretty annoying, but I don't think overall disruption to the article is enough that we can justify semi-ing the whole thing. I've added a hidden comment at the bottom of the discography: it certainly won't stop everything, but hopefully some well-meaning contributors will notice. ~ mazca ^t|c 18:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Iron Maiden

That's about it, I think Maiden it's being waaay underated here on wikipedia, and deserves mora than what's getting, just look at the NIN pages, looks awesome, then how it's posible that one of the greatest metal bands of all time has an article that doesn't even meet the "OK" criteria. Rockk3r Spit it Out! 01:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

If someone else wants to join me to create this wikiproject, then you're welcome to join (as it cannot be created with only one user as editor)

Add yourself to this list, and let's bring the maiden-related pages to a better status!

1. Rockk3r
2. Cannibaloki 04:02, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

3.--Insaneingus (talk) 01:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

IRON MAIDEN SALES 2

iron maiden have sold over 100 milion records! .It's not logical to say that you change the number of the sales to 70 million because you think that is too much. i have also to say that iron maiden have sold more than metallica,nirvana and others!Krem12 (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

By all means, find a good source for the information and change it. Currently the source (the band themselves) claims 70 million, not 100...so please do not change it until you can properly source it. And believe me, I'm more than willing to give credit where credit is due, especially with my favorite band of 20+ years...but I still want verification before we embrace such an edit. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 13:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Go to last.fm ant type in search box iron maiden ,in the moment that an iron maiden song plays read their history,it says that they have sold MORE than 100 million records!Krem12 (talk) 12:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

BIILBOARD SPECIAL EDITION

in the image and legacy section of the article used to be a line saying that the only time that billboard magazine changed the letters of it's name was when somewhere back in time released and the name was written with iron maiden style of letters.what happened to this line????? Krem12 (talk) 10:36, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Continuing SBIT World Tour

http://www.ironmaiden.com/index.php?categoryid=1 It states more dates for South And Central America are to be announced. And they will also play for the first time in Peru to 40,000 fans. --Insaneingus (talk) 21:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I've added a brief summary of this new leg of the tour (though I do wish they'd either come play in the UK again or make a new album!). The whole paragraph involving this tour probably wants a general cleanup, but it's hard to do it at the moment with the combination of past- and future-tenses. I guess after March it will be easier to condense. ~ mazca ^t|c 00:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Hope they come to florida...they haven't been here for 16 years.--Insaneingus (talk) 01:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Openning Paragraph

It looks pretty good so far, but it would give a better first impression if it said about how influencial they are/were on metal bands, and on metal as a whole. They are easily in the top 5 most influencial metal bands from the error and probably of all time. It would make the band seem more impressive than the opening article leads on. And isn't that the idea of an openning paragraph, to give a good first impression? Xanthic-Ztk (talk) 04:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

"top 5 most influential metal bands" is hard to quantify and just as hard to source. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 14:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Formation

I think it should be noted that they were formed in 1975, but when you say that, sounds like they were formed for a whole year. They formed on xmas, so that was only 5 days in 1975. The history, and everything should start in 1976. Afterall they didn't do anything worth of mention in those 5 days, it really sounds like if it had been for a whole year, this should be fixed.  Rockk3r Spit it Out! 06:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The format on wikipedia seems to call for putting in the year, not the year with a disclaimer. Using 1976 as the year they were formed would be factually inaccurate. The article is fine the way it is, as anyone looking for more detail will discover that they were formed on Christmas. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 11:49, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. They formed in 1975 - that's a fact, and that's correct. While they might not have done anything "worthy of mention" in those five days, they had indeed formed the band so the history of it starts there. Plus, any kind of disclaimer would strike me as kind of useless: not only is the difference between them being a band for either 33 or 34 years fairly academic at this point, but in the "history" section the first sentence states exactly when they were formed in that year. It works for me. ~ mazca ^t|c 14:04, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

OK you convinced me haha. I agree that it's ok the way it is now, and anyone looking further will find out they formed on xmas just by reading the first sentence of the history section.  Rockk3r Spit it Out! 16:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Iron Maiden Sales

I have 2 reliable sources that show Iron Maiden has sold over 80 million albums. If you have any problems please feel free to say :) Cheers!

http://www.phillyburbs.com/musicguide/ironmaiden.shtml

http://www.whatrecords.co.uk/iron-maiden.asp Ralfisloved (talk) 21:44, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've seen those ones before. There are other quasi-reliable sources that say 100 million, 90 million, and 70 million. Given the contradiction, I'm most comfortable with leaving it at 70 million - (a) all the sources agree it's "more than 70 million" and (b) one of the sources for that figure is the band's official website. ~ mazca ^t|c 22:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

i have a link that claims more than 100 million,it's last fm so it's reliable.Type the following: http://www.last.fm/music/Iron+Maiden/+wiki Krem12 (talk) 10:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Last.fm is self-described as a "social network and music recommendation engine." At best, it's "quasi-reliable". Ynot4tony2 (talk) 16:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Last.fm's artist info pages are a wiki, and an unsourced one at that. The opening paragraph is taken verbatim from an old version of the Wikipedia article, in which an unsourced claim of 100 million was made. This is why Wikis are not usable as reliable sources: if we used this as a source for an album figure, we'd effectively be sourcing ourselves. ~ mazca ^t|c 14:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Missing Discographies

Hi all, I've noticed the following albums aren't mentioned in the Discography section. I was wondering if there's any specific reason to that? -- User:Xushi

• 1985: Live After Death
• 1994: Live At Donington
• 1989: Maiden England
• 2005: Death On The Road
• The Very Best Of
• 1998: A Real Live Dead One - 2 albums
• 2002: Edward the Great
• 1999: Ed Hunter

This serves? (Iron Maiden discography); "Missing Discographies" or released albums? Cannibaloki 21:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, by past consensus we just keep their new-material studio albums on the main article page, and the linked discography contains all the other releases. The ones you mentioned are live albums and best-of compilations. ~ mazca ^t|c 00:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Derek Riggs' Insignia

I think there should be a column on the Derek Riggs' insignia on the page and especially his killer artwork on the Somewhere in Time album and the various references that are present on the cover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazardous id (talk • contribs) 05:15, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The wiki page for Riggs has a feature on this insignia and where it appears in his artwork. The references in the Somewhere in Time album cover are a bit too detailed and specific to merit a detailed inclusion in a general encyclopedia, I feel. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 16:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, i am aware of that. But since there's a separate section called "Image and Legacy" I think its relevant in this page too. However, I agree with you about the Somewhere in Time cover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazardous id (talk • contribs) 15:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Any information about Maiden ought to have atleast a subsection on Eddie and Riggs. Eddie is unquestionably the most recognised face of any band (as a mascot) and Riggs has played a significant part in his history.220.224.15.16 (talk) 19:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Arrold.

We already have a distinct mention of Eddie in the "Image and legacy" section, with a link to the article Eddie the Head, which covers his origins and image in worrying detail. The main Iron Maiden article is already fairly long and there is a lot of information to include - I don't see why we really need to have more than a sentence or two about Eddie considering there's a separate article. ~ mazca ^t|c 19:34, 14 January 2009 (UTC)