Jump to content

Talk:The Haunted (Swedish band)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Metalcore.

[edit]

Unless this is metalcore (not the weak American shit with boyband choruses) then metalcore doesn't exist. But I'd say it's thrash. Modern thrash. Just look at their first album, the one that kickstarted the late 90's thrash revival. Death metal it is not. 84.19.130.30 (talk) 11:44, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are. There's a very very slight thrash influence in the first two albums, but as a whole the band is metalcore with Gothenburg overtones, especially the latest album.

I beg to differ, they are not metalcore, there is clearly no hardcore influences. Read the comment above by "unrealshadow13" Dexter prog 15:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unless cited, metalcore will not be acceptable as their main genres. The Phantomnaut (talk) 20:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, they actually do have hardcore influences, but I do agree in not calling them metalcore. I would say "Groove influenced Death Metal"70.152.147.74 (talk) 03:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Made Me Do It.

[edit]

I removed the “The Haunted” from in front “Made Me Do It”. I believe this is right, this was how it was labled from the shop I bought it at. mat35

I agree. I don't know why people like to add that part, can't they read labels? Dexter prog 15:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The official site lists it as "The Haunted Made Me Do It." --Vyran 13:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is called Made Me Do It, but this is only so that it wouldn't be The Haunted - The Haunted Made Me Do It. It is meant to be read The Haunted Made Me Do It. AkiShinji 19:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.the-haunted.com

[edit]

Someone removed the link to the official website. Why? - Aki 17:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because the URL is already listed in the "Infobox musical artist"-box? Cic 15:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Still, I don't think it means problem to anyone having it listed twice. - Aki 19:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good idea to have it in both the infobox and in the bottom; maybe someone might miss the link in the infobox. AKnot 01:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:HauntedDeadEye.jpg

[edit]

Image:HauntedDeadEye.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:TheHaunted revolver.jpg

[edit]

Image:TheHaunted revolver.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:TheHaunted TheHauntedMadeMeDoIt.jpg

[edit]

Image:TheHaunted TheHauntedMadeMeDoIt.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:TheHaunted The Haunted.jpg

[edit]

Image:TheHaunted The Haunted.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:TheHaunted OneKillWonder.jpg

[edit]

Image:TheHaunted OneKillWonder.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:TheHaunted Band Logo.png

[edit]

Image:TheHaunted Band Logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

[edit]

There appears to be a certain amount of pointless edit-warring going on. Can people please supply reliable sources for genre or please move along and waste someone else's time. Thank you. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 17:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Metal Archives lists them as Groove Metal/Death Metal70.152.147.74 (talk) 10:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Metal Archives is not a reliable source. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 22:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Metal Archives is a reliable source. kensane
Not really. Due to some people's interpretations of some genres (like In Flames for example), it can't really be helpful in genres. The Phantomnaut (talk) 04:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some citations for The Haunted being Post Thrash or Groove:

[edit]

http://www.sputnikmusic.com/album.php?reviewid=5873&page=1 http://www.treehouseofdeath.com/?p=455 http://www.teufelstomb.com/reviews/thehaunted-thedeadeye/ (this guy is harshly critisizing half-thrash) http://www.centurymedia.com/us/news.php?artist_ID=22 <--- this one is probably the most important one, as its used by both Century Media and by Metal Edge magazine. They describe them as "Post Thrash" DarrelClemmons (talk) 21:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Century Media cite a review by Metal Edge. That is not the same as them endorsing it as a real genre. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 21:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get it? Metal Edge is reliable. I don't really understand the counter-point. Metal Edge is reliable. DarrelClemmons (talk) 09:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More sources: http://www.fourteeng.net/reviews/metalforthemasses.html http://www.komodorock.com/latest-news/latest-news/the-haunted-post-new-song-online-and-release-cover-art-for-'versus'-200808196987/ ^ In the above citation, Century Media, their label, describes their sound as "Power-Groove" which if I'm not mistaken, was the same term used for the approach used by Pantera, Exhorder, and Machine head in early 90's Kerrang magazine, in Metal Edge, et cetera. Its a term thats still used to describe the synonymous 'post thrash/neo thrash/groove metal' that people say. I believe Power Groove was the first verifiable citation of the term "Power Groove Thrash Metal" But I'm not trying to debate or anger you or step on toes. Its just that the citations are there. There are a sizable number of magazines that call them a mixture of melodic death metal and power groove/post thrash. I'm just saying that the sources are there. In searches on google, there are sizable results for "The Haunted" and "Post Thrash" and "Groove Metal" - not as many as "Death Metal" (nearly half a million) but there are some 75,000 results for "The Haunted Groove Metal" which makes me think hmm if there are that many other people must think that as well, and thats how I stumbled across both century media (their own label) calling them power groove, and metal edge (a very popular metal magazine) calling them post-thrash. I'm sorry BlackMetalBaz. I'm not trying to argue or edit war, but there are lots of verifiable sources out there for The Haunted being post thrash. I like you BlackMetalBaz, I think a lot of your edits are very good and I have a lot of respect for you. I know you know a lot about metal and stuff but man, if their own record label says they're post thrash thats kind of hard to argue with, as well as metal edge magazine? But anyway, I'm sorry if I've offended you, I have a lot of respect for you, man, so don't take my posts wrong. Its just not right (even erroneous), to assume its "poorly sourced" when even their own label calls them both "post thrash" and "power groove"! DarrelClemmons (talk) 09:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with DarrelClemmons's claim. The Haunted should be classed as a "post-thrash" or as he also put it, "power groove" band. They are not a thrash metal group. - kensane
That should be acceptable sources, but they are a thrash metal group especially with their first album. The Phantomnaut (talk) 04:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with DarrelClemmons. Kameejl (Talk) 07:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, seriously, do you need "sources" to tell you what a band sounds like? Go listen to albums from Kreator, early Metallica, Anthrax, Sodom, Celtic Frost, as well as Evile, Warbringer, and Merciless Death. I've listed you some of the classic thrash bands and some modern day bands - these are real thrash bands, and you will notice that they all share similar musical characteristics. Now go and listen to something from The Haunted... does it sound similar to any of these bands? No? There's your source. kensane —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's your opinion (as well as mine mentioned) but was that really necessary? The Phantomnaut (talk) 23:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You may find it's the same "opinion" from a lot of hardcore thrash metal fans as well. Then again, they're classified as a "heavy metal" group on their wiki page now. kensane
If it sounds like thrash, then it's probably thrash. ALL of their albums sounds more like thrash than anything else. Melodeath influences in their 2nd/3rd, -core soundish on revolver and experimental on the dead eye. Mainline- There's NOTHING groove metally about them. I don't know what the hell "Power Groove" is supposed to be, another useless genre creation, I reckon. They don't even play in groove tempo, so how can they be groove metal? Sure, tempo changes and some slower songs, it doesn't equal groove metal overall. Labeling them as groove metal on One Kill Wonder as well is absolutely ridicolus. Please stop citing random user reviews and throw genres at bands for no reason at all, and more importantly for the wrong reasons. GamlaSonn (talk) 20:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the/The

[edit]

You are invited to participate in an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles on the issue of capitalising the definite article when mentioning that band's name in running prose. This long-standing dispute is the subject of an open mediation case and we are requesting your help with determining the current community consensus. Thank you.--andreasegde (talk) 06:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Haunted discography

[edit]

Support split - Discography section is long and should be split to a new article entitled The Haunted discography. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:47, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on The Haunted. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 09:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Haunted. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 23:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Haunted. 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) 00:25, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Haunted. 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) 00:51, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 April 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 18:11, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


The Haunted → The Haunted (Swedish band) – no way is this the WP:Primary topic among the dozens of entries in Haunted (disambiguation), including The Haunted (1991 film) and The Haunted (Canadian band). The long-term significance of the phrase is clearly as a description of people, places or things who who are haunted ... not as the name of a 20-yo rock band, however good they may be.
A Gbooks search for "The Haunted" shows no mention of this band in the first 100 hits. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:32, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • But that's not how our search system is designed -- we are not Google. Someone hoping to find "Edible Book Day" will have no luck searching "Edible," or Mighty Joe Young searching "Mighty," or The Fighting Temptations by searching "the Fighting." I'm all for making reasonable accommodation for our readers, but that doesn't extend to changing how our search system functions to accomodate those who will seek a subject by searching a term it could never be reasonably titled by, and are then unwilling to use hatnotes. Again, I'm not even weighing in on this situation, I'm just saying there should be evidence that those searching for pages titled "The Haunted" would not primarily be looking for this one.--Yaksar (let's chat) 19:28, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Disambiguation is better than mis-identifying a primary topic. The burden of proof should be on those proposing that a specific page is primary. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 14:58, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. There's no clear primary topic, and in the words of Sangdeboeuf above, "Disambiguation is better than mis-identifying a primary topic. The burden of proof should be on those proposing that a specific page is primary." Paintspot Infez (talk) 23:07, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Primary topic is about making life easier for the reader, not the burden of proof. Wikipedia has only three titles for "The Haunted" (as opposed to "Haunted"). See this pageview analysis. Nobody will go to the trouble of typing an extra "the" if the title they want is simply "Haunted." Nine Zulu queens (talk) 09:14, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nine Zulu queens: You express a common misunderstanding of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.
    See WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT: The fact that an article has a different title is not a factor in determining whether a topic is primary.
    In this case it is entirely plausible that a reader may be mistaken as to whether any one of the ~30 film/TV/literary articles listed at Haunted (disambiguation) was called "The Haunted" or just "Haunted". So your pageviews comparison needs a few dozen more pages, and then you need to make a case for the long-term significance of a 20-yo band.
    Oh, and please don't assume that you are the only one interested in making life easier for the reader. Everyone participating in this discussion is trying to making life easier for the reader. @Paintspot's point was that those who propose one article out of dozens as a primary topic need to prove that it would actually make life easier for the reader. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:53, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The burden of proof is on the editors who propose a change, not on those who are defending the longstanding consensus version. We should assume that readers know what they want. Who types “The Haunted” when looking for a work titled simply “Haunted”? See WP:SMALLDETAILS. This is bigger than a "small" detail, so using it to differentiate articles is even more valid. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 10:29, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    You didn't read what I wrote, so I'll repeat it: it is entirely plausible that a reader may be mistaken as to whether any one of the ~30 film/TV/literary articles listed at Haunted (disambiguation) was called "The Haunted" or just "Haunted".
    And yes, you do need to prove that the band is the primary topic, rather than simply asserting that it helps readers and has always been at this title. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:51, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Should I do the math for you? This subject gets 196 hits a day out of 321 relevant hits. That's 61 percent of relevant hits. "A topic is primary for a term with respect to usage if it is...more likely than all the other topics combined," per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. I interpret that to mean that if a topic gets over 50 percent of the relevant hits, it should be primary. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    NZq, 100 percent of the people in this room riqht now are laughing at your maths.
    My calculation is perfectly accurate, but of course the result is a completely spurious figure beacuse I have rigged the sample by excluding everyone is not in my study ... just like you rigged your calculation by excluding articles which don't have "the" in the title. GIGO. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:26, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Comments in an RM should support or oppose the proposal based on its merits. Please refrain from rudeness and personal remarks. As I have already explained, editors are encouraged to differentiate articles by WP:SMALLDETAILS. The examples given in the guideline include red meat vs. Red Meat, friendly fire, vs. Friendly Fire, and The Wörld Is Yours vs. The World Is Yours. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 01:30, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    NZq, if you don't want personalised replies, don't make a personalised post — as you did by suggesting that my maths was deficient.
    Please read WP:SMALLDETAILS, which says The general approach is that whatever readers might type in the search box, they are guided as swiftly as possible to the topic they might reasonably be expected to be looking for. You have not shown any evidence that readers are likely to know whether one of the ~30 film/book/TV topics listed on the bad page is titled called "The Haunted" or just "Haunted" ... and without that evidence, your pageview data is a rigged sample. You also ignore the long-term significance criterion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:42, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. As we have The Haunted (Canadian band) this seems fairly obvious to me (having heard of neither, but the Canadian one predates the Swedish one by several decades). Oculi (talk) 10:49, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support redirect to Haunted In ictu oculi (talk) 18:45, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and above. I would personally redirect the name to The Haunting (1963 film), which is close enough for comfort (it's recognized as one of the scariest films). Randy Kryn (talk) 15:10, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rreagan007 (talk) 15:41, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Haunted_(Swedish_band)&oldid=1207588667"