I logged in today to find not one, but two messages from BastardHead and Diamhea

BastardHead's message said :"Yo, why did you change Winds of Plague's debut to a demo? Don't go lonewolfing major shit like that without a source."

Well considering that Metal Archives doesnt really have a way to make "a source", i don't see how I'm able to do such a thing by his request. Furthermore, A Cold Day in Hell has ALWAYS been credited as a demo. used to be a huge fan of WoP and i've seen it considered as such several times. There's also other websites such as

1) https://metal.aminoapps.com/page/item/w ... LVZx2NZoPW
2) and also on discogs https://www.discogs.com/Winds-Of-Plague ... se/4719610
that list it as a demo.

It is however, sometimes, listed as a debut full album, so as I said. I don't feel how I'm in the wrong here, as the release has been called both (a album and a demo).

And in response to Diamhea's message "Yeah, some users are complaining about the edits your are making, like deleting/moving tracks for no valid reason.", I'd like to ask where these complaints are coming from... I dont "delete or move tracks for no valid reason", I dont even recall ever doing anything of that sort.

I only make changes on the site for the better of the entries for the bands on here, if somebody can point my in a correct direction of where I can address this accordingly, I'd like to because I really feel like I'm being wrongly accused of my actions. All I ever do is just make repairs which I never feel are an issue.

i just feel like these accusations are unfair on my part, it always seems like if you dont get why im doing something, i feel like i have a finger being pointed at me that im some disruptive fuckhead ONLY because you dont understand why i did it.

Metal Archives doesnt have stuff like a edit summary (such as Wikipedia) where you can explain your edits. if it had one, i'd use it, but it doesn't so the hostility i get for this sort of stuff is kind of overboard. I have no problem if you want to consider the release a full length, but just be aware that I have seen it called BOTH a demo AND a full length, and i've always felt like it's more of a demo, and thats the only reason why i changed it.

This official biography from the band's label Century Media refers to A Cold Day in Hell as a "first offering" and Decimate the Weak as a "next album" and "sophomore release": https://web.archive.org/web/20071213234 ... .php?ID=82

And in this 2008 interview the interviewer refers to A Cold Day in Hell as a "first album" and Decimate the Weak as a "new album": https://www.boardmag.com/mag/mehr/and-m ... -interview

And this promo blurb from Blabbermouth calls Decimate the Weak the "second full-length album" before it was ever released: http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/winds- ... a-records/

I did find a couple interviewers who refer to it as an independent "demo", so there is some inconsistency there, but based on what was said at the time by the labels/sent out by the labels to the press, I think there's enough evidence to say that it was considered a full-length album at the time of release, similar to Mate. Feed. Kill. Repeat. by Slipknot. Also, the Discogs link you posted doesn't say anything about it not being an album. I agree with you that this is why we need a "source" field, though, to eliminate confusion in matters like this.

I don't think this is really a big deal at all. Maybe add a note to that album addressing the confusion. We'll all live.

An "edit source" or "edit summary" is something we're looking into and are considering. That said - and especially for well documented and popular bands - if there is an issue that is contentious (ie. sources disagree, and/or the change you want to make is to something that's been a certain way for years), the best advice I can give you is to make a report asking for second opinions first before making any edits. This will help alleviate miscommunication and make the job we do (both of us, contributor and mod) easier. It may not necessarily be the case here, but I cannot stress just how important this is for widely known bands. If information is displayed on such a band's page in a certain way, you can probably bet that it's been discussed and decided on before. Changing things around from the established norm will inevitably raise the eyebrows of others.