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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Black Metal, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Black MetalWikipedia:WikiProject Black MetalTemplate:WikiProject Black MetalBlack Metal articles
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
There's a bit of useful information on Stormblast (re-recorded) that I think needs to be merged into this article, since the two albums are very similar. Does anybody disagree? -Freekee 05:19, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I absolutely disagree. The re-recorded Stormblåst MMV is a completely different album. I listened to the original until my CD melted back in the 90s, and I told my girlfriend about the album. One day in the car, she put on something I didn't recognize. A few songs into it, I asked "What's this?" and she looked at me as if I'd just announced my desire to have a second thumb installed on my left hand. She said "Stormblåst!" and I said "Errr...I don't think so," and all was confusion for a few minutes until she showed me the cover. I was unaware that the album had been re-recorded (i.e. ruined and stripped of all merit) in 2005. Long story, I know, but my point is, the two albums have only the title in common.
I disagree, this albums sound completely different and the re-recorded version has unreleased tracks. --Dexter prog 17:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Dexter; the re-release has a significantly different sound, some of the parts of the old version are missing in the re-recorded (the piano intro to Alt Lys Er Svunnet Hen). Mister Deranged 22:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure there are differences in the rerecording, but could the differences be explained in the merged article? Otherwise, half of the info that is in one, will also be in the other. I think it's similar to song articles, where several versions of a song are discussed in one article. -Freekee 05:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. Do not merge them together. The re-recording is something totaly different than the original one. - FT 80.219.227.205 10:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then why does it have the same title and why do all the songs have the same titles? -Freekee 03:28, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why exactly are you even editing this page if you have no clue about the band and music? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.80.216.195 (talk) 14:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A different sound is nothing, I think, so large as the same name, same band, and fact that it is a re-recording of the same album. I don't think a different sound has anything to do with it; they are the same but for the sound, a small note. Some note should be made about the additional track and the substitution of Del II for the original SK but otherwise, ja ja. JRDarby 03:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And the text of the article for the original reads almost the same as the rerecorded version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freekee (talk • contribs) 15:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree because of how the band it self completely changed (look at members, how their genres of choice changed, etc.) before the "Enthroned..." album, how the tracks them selves sound different, how Dell II instead of the original (even though it was copyright-infringed) was used and the extra tracks weren't on the original. HOWEVER there definitely should be some text and a link to something saying "...also there is a re-recorded version [insert info here] [blah, click here, blah] -Adrian O. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.232.119.80 (talk) 17:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is a widely followed opinion that cover versions should all be discussed in the same article. This is why I suggest that the articles be merged. I get the impression that the people who disagree with me are just fans of the band who are saying, "no way dude! These are completely different albums!" They are clearly not completely different, and the fact that the articles are almost exactly the same bears this out. I would recommend that the article be merged until such time as a need arises for them to be separated.
However, since the merge template has been here since last December, and no one has left a comment agreeing with me, I will remove the merge templates. If this were a high profile band, I would probably fight harder for it, on grounds that the article needs to set an example for Wikipedia. But it's not. -Freekee 15:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
