Talk:Black metal

Archives
February 2002 - May 2006 June 2006 - April 2008

Danish Black Metal

Don't remove Denmark. Denmark is a part of Scandinavia and have lots of black-metal bands too. I don't understand why somebody don't want them within, but they got Illnath, Nortt and Sort Regn. Their important for Greenland, Iceland and Germany. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.138.165.247 (talk) 13:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

At least some of these bands are somehow well-known, but have no real importance to Black Metal as a whole (and you have to prove their importance from Greenland, Iceland and Germany). You should rather have mentioned Denial of God. Mercyful Fate is obviously an important first wave band from Denmark mentioned already. --217/83 17:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Ukrainian Black Metal scene

Do not remove Lucifugum and Nokturnal Mortum from "The second Wave of Black Metal". Ukrainian scene is not less important and known than Polish or French scene. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Black pauk1488 (talk • contribs) 05:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

These bands do not belong in the "second wave" because neither released any music until 1995. The others are listed there because they all released music before then. Also, who is to say which scene is more or less important? ~Asarlaí 16:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Lucifugum and Nokturnal Mortum are not half as important as were some of the bands from the Polish and French scenes. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Banning in Malaysia

i think under the history section the banning of black metal in malaysia should be mentioned Malacath (talk) 16:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

If you can source it, please, do so. There were also such attempts in the United Kingdom, see Lords of Chaos (though the book can’t be really trusted, for several reasons). --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Sub-genres and fusion-genres

I just realized this page makes no mention of sub-genres, fusion genres, etc. Most of the other metal subgenre articles have small sections about their sub/fusion genres (see death metal) with links to the main article of that sub-sub genre. This page should have that was well. I propose a section that talks about melodic black metal, symphonic black metal and blackened death metal under their own headings (like the death metal article. We can even have a small black/doom section (see doom metal, they have the section). I will start by adding that section. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm all for adding a section for the legitimate subgenres but this black/doom thing smacks of original research and neologism. After all, the entry itself states that "pure blackened doom bands are fairly rare, but bands such as" so-and-so "may be considered part of the style, despite their tendency to focus on black metal." Doesn't sound very convincing that this subgenre really exists then. The doom metal article apparently has many problems so I wouldn't use anything from it, quite frankly. --Bardin (talk) 08:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Adding subgenres is overrated, and inventing pseudo-genres such as “melodic black metal”, “symphonic black metal” and “blackened death metal” is stupid. The idea of Black Doom is not that new, though; I know flyers advertising Barathrum als jetblack doom-metal. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Everything you say is true and I agree. That being said, black/doom is a real genre. I'm sure sources could be found, but it might be hard. I mean, think about it. Both black and doom are very underground now. So bands that combine both are gonna be seriously underground and rare. But I know the genre exists. Argentum is a perfect example (though they do not have a page here on wikipedia). It's just really slowed down heavy black metal (but not gay like "dark metal" [the stuff where they combine gothic and black metal, like mid-period Rotting Christ or CoF or other gay crap]). But, yeah, I suppose it can be left out. But the other "legitimate" genres should be added as you said. So far the only ones I can think of are blackened death metal, melodic black metal and symphonic black metal. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 18:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Tell me where I can find Goth in Cradle of Filth’s music. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Its not original research. Doom-metal.com clearly lists blackened dooma s a genre, and they are in theory the experts.

Nortt is a very obvious example of blackened doom.

Doom-metal.com actually isn't a reliable source, nor can they be considered experts just because they have a web site, and Nortt is funeral metal with black metal influence...Just because a band describes their music in a certain way doesn't mean that it's a legitimate genre. Mindless Self Indulgence describes their music as 'Industrial Jungle Pussy Punk', but you don't see that mentioned as a legitimate genre anywhere on Wikipedia. rzrscm (talk) 23:35, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Q: Should we add "Black and Roll" as a sub-genre? I've heard this term recently used to describe Craft, Off And Die, and some Shining recordings? Having trouble finding online examples of its usage though. E. Swann (talk) 05:22, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

depressive black metal redirects here but no mention is made of the subgenre.

Because it isn't a real subgenre with sources to back it up, which is why it redirects here just like typos tend to redirect to their correct article. rzrscm (talk) 23:35, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

What about blackened death metal (redirected to here -- bands like Impaled Nazarene and Behemoth (band)) -- how should they be incorporated into the main article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.101.1.21 (talk) 06:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Dark Metal?

Howcome dark metal is redirected to black metal?first of all what they mean by dark metal is that the genre has lyrics having to do with gothic influences such as depression,despair,sorrowness,melancholy and doom influences that also have death metal influences and black metal influences bands like Shade Empire,Graveworm,and Thy Serpent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.178.172.124 (talk) 22:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Because it has been discussed ad nauseum. People argue over it and won't agree what it is. Also there are only a few sources that even say it exists. I agree, though. Dark metal is black metal fused with gothic metal, like mid-period Rotting Christ or even CoF (though they suck;I mean I think dark metal sucks anyways, but CoF is bad even for dark metal). If someone found some reliable sources supporting its existence then it could be made into an article. There has been a dark metal article on wikipedia before (about 3 times) but each time it was deleted. Too much WP:OR. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

well ive heard it called blathic metal or Blackend gothic ive heard of dark metal as a description tooMalacath (talk) 16:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Lmao @ "blathic." I've only heard blackened gothic and dark metal. Mostly dark metal. I don't know why there's not much info about it on the web (that can be found easily, anyway). It is a real genre, although I admit there are not many who have played the style and it's a newer genre. Also, I don't think it gets a lot of attention because of a lack of fans. Everyone I know who knows of the genre doesn't like dark metal, and neither do I. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Dark metal exists.It is experimental gothic-/doom-black metal. And it's from the post-black metal developments. However there aren't any realiable sources to describe what the genre's haracteristics are, cause it's a relatively new style with not many well-known bands to play it, so it doesn't have its own page. Xr 1 (talk) 13:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Cite your sources, please. Saying things like that without sources to back it up is like making laws with no police to enforce it. Zouavman Le Zouave 10:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this was addressed to me, however I'll respond.

There are NO reliable sources about dark metal.The only place in the internet to provide some information about it is doom-metal.com.That's why the arcicle of dark metal was deleted.I was actually against this deletion because in the metal circles, people say that or that is dark metal and give some explanations, as I did above.Also in the metal archives there are plenety of bands laballed as dark metal.But this could not prove anything.

I just gave my personal opinion.I think everything that has developed from black metal by some experimentation, like the music of Ihsahn or Samael, or Arcturus, is post-black.But no sources about that, just some Last.fm tagging...

Xr 1 (talk) 11:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You could restore the article and adapt it according to the German one, which is sourced. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Alright, that therefore reflects your personal vision on the musical landscape and not a reliable testimony made by a published expert in the matter. I think we should spend our time looking for sources rather than dwell on neologisms that still don't have established meanings. Zouavman Le Zouave 12:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

This is talk page. everyone here can share their personal thoughts and views.It's made for this + I've already said there are no sources about dark metal so you could search but you'll find nothing.So, discussing further is rather pointless. Xr 1 (talk) 14:17, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

There are sources, see above. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

This is from a previous version of Wikipedia's dark metal article, and is the most accurate I've seen. (all bulleted list items below are quoted from that article.)

• "Dark metal is a subjective term used to describe metal bands from various genres that have combined traits from symphonic black metal, gothic metal, doom metal, dark wave and black metal[1] such as synthesizer use, acoustic guitar experimentation and/or operatic female vocals. The music can be described as an atmospheric, melodic, more sophisticated sound within the metal genre, and sometimes also with progressive touch. The lyrics are often introspective and poetic. Some dark metal bands also often incorporate death metal influences."

But dark metal is not a "subjective" term. If you really like metal music, you know that it's a term agreed by most metal fans, and a very necessary term. Much like another umbrella term "extreme metal". It should be noted that dark metal includes black metal, but NOT death metal. Again, if you really like metal, you know why. Dark metal should be sad, sorrowful, often slow, and just feels "down".

• "The term is thought to have been coined by German Band Bethlehem, with their album Dark Metal from 1994.source"
• "Other most important bands in dark metal genre, are Rotting Christ (mid), Thy Serpent, Deinonychus, Empyrium, Agalloch, Forgotten Tomb and Katatonia (early)."

Especially Agalloch, it's a folk metal (or neofolk, sometimes) band, but cannot be described by any better term than "dark metal". There's no universal definition on "dark metal". Some people think that "dark metal" is simply "metal music that is darker than the usual metal music". Maybe we need a disambiguation here. Pagen HD (talk) 10:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Genres are descriptive terms for music with specific sound. Simply: it needs to be a universal term to be a genre. Dark metal does not have a specific sound. It is applied by magazines, record labels and bands to cover a range of bands that sound nothing alike. Bethlehem, modern Katatonia, Madder Mortem, Rotting Christ, Novembers Doom and Throes of Dawn are all described as Dark Metal by various commentators but none of these bands sounds alike. Of these bands only Throes of Dawn are almost universally described as Dark Metal, simply because, more than any other band listed in this discussion, they have the most undefinable sound without being either progressive or avant-garde. Ergo, if Dark Metal exists, Throes of Dawn are probably the only Dark metal band... which is nonsense. Ultimately people love to use the term Dark Metal because they want to sound clever, diverse or distant from a particular scene (such as Gothic Metal, which is probably the most apt description for most of the bands listed). Also, saying "if you really like Metal" doesn't change the fact that you're just spouting your opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.225.28.159 (talk) 12:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

You have no idea about Gothic Metal if you really believe those bands to fit in there. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I understand that the dark metal article was deleted because there was no reliable source. But why redirect it? Is there a reliable source for dark metal being the same thing as black metal? Pagen HD (talk) 10:26, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Mock Black Metal

Should mock black metal have a mention somewhere. bands like immortal bacon throne, Asspounder and morbid anal fog are bands ive Heard of. although i dont think it is too "important" to include what are all your thoughts- Malacath Serve in Heaven or Rule in Hell (talk) 15:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

No, it's pointless. Scskowron (talk) 23:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I second that this is pointless, not to mention that Immortal bacon Throne are not a band, although Nokturnal Bacon Throne is a Morbid Anal Fog song. 202.6.138.66 (talk) 05:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Melodic black metal

someone deleted this page. why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.220.90.98 (talk) 18:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Because of a total lack of sources discussing it as a legitimate subgenre. The AfD discussion is archived here. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I know it was deleted for lack of sources but some bands are directly known as melodic black metal and sound nothing like Darkthrone, Marduk, Mayhem or Gorgoroth and don't have symphonic elements like Emperor, Arcturus or Graveworm. So to my point: what about the odd source that clearly states that they are melodic black metal? If that is so, then shouldn't it be written as such but redirected here? That's just what I think though. Obviously I will get people telling me it's a "fantasy genre" or "it was deleted for lack of sources" such as above. In the underground however, it is a well-known genre. FireCrystal (talk) 22:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that there are no sources to suggest that it is a genre. Yes, some bands are described as "melodic", but then you can find plenty of hits for "raw black metal" as well, and that's not a genre either. Ideally, when all these band articles are completed, then they should have a Style section which can discuss the use of melody in these bands' music, but you cannot conjure up a genre by pointing to uses of the phrase "melodic black metal"... you need sources discussing it as a subgenre. As per the AfD, these sources don't exist. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 14:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, we can wait some 20+ years before any real sources appear or that it gets rewritten in a way like folk metal has which would be great but what are the chances of that? If you think that melodic is used as a descriptor, I wonder why melodic death metal wasn't deleted along with it. Though I would guess it is much more known as a subgenre than melodic black and the article does need help but that's a different story. FireCrystal (talk) 20:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The thing about folk metal is that while there isn't a book or an academic essay that has discussed it, there are multiple sources out there treating it as a legitimate genre. There might not be an article page about folk metal on Allmusic but there are reviews on the site that clearly treats it as a genre: eg. "folk metal isn't some empty gimmick; it is a totally legitimate part of world music" here, "Pagan or folk-metal ... has become one of the fastest-growing subgenres in metal" here, etc. The same applies to melodic death metal (moreso since it's been recognized in books). I was not able to find any similar treatment of melodic black metal. Only four reviews on Allmusic even use the term and they just use it an adjective description: eg. "Lord Belial's mix of melodic black metal and powerful death metal". It's the same on About.com: eg. "Gehenna started as a melodic black metal band, and then evolved into a more aggressive black metal band". The use of melodic here is the same as the use of powerful or aggressive. That's different to something like "the entire melodic death metal movement" here. Some of the reviews on Allmusic even insert the term melodic death metal under quotation marks to make it clear that melodic isn't being used as just an adjective: eg. "a German band with a Swedish-style approach to what has been termed "melodic death metal"" here, "three of the terms that one hears in connection with death metal are "technical death metal," "melodic death metal" and "blackened death metal"" here, etc. There's even an article just on melodic death metal on about.com. --Bardin (talk) 11:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

There actually is a master thesis about folk metal. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Melodic black metal must have article and must be accepted as Black metal subgenre. It is big difference between Symphonic black metal and Melodic black metal. There is some reason for discrediting of that genre but that almost the same resason for discrediting i can find for Viking black metal and Blackened death metal. Melodic black metal have scene, have his fetures. I am considering last.fm as a reliable source because they are credited on much other articles as a reliable source.Last.fm article about Melodic black metal.Vater-96 (talk) 21:02, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

No, last.fm isn't a reliable source, it is WP:OR. It should not be credited in other articles. Also, read WP:GENREWARRIOR. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay if last.fm is not reliable one what do you say on Blabbermouth.net - This is Blabbermouths article about Swedish Melodic black metal band Siebenburgen. At the beginning it says Melodic black metallers. P.S. I am not Genre warior. I have edited many articles and improved their quality. I just strongly intercede existence of Melodic black metal because it is really a subgenre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vater-96 (talk • contribs) 21:30, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I think thats enough, because Blabbermouth guys are surely careful about something what they write. I will re-create Melodic black metal article and add it to Black metal style.Vater-96 (talk) 21:53, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

No, they obviously aren’t. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to have to say Blabbermouth is not a reliable source either. It is essentially a large forum, albeit a good one. Anyone who is registered can contribute, entries are anonymous and unsourced.--SabreBD (talk) 09:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Blabbermouth is for sure no good forum. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Depressive Suicidal Black Metal (DSBM)

If NSBM is given it's own section, shouldn't DSBM be given a section as well? -- Jack

NSBM is a pretty established concept, DSBM isn't. Dark Prime (talk) 19:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes it is. Cdh1984 (talk) 19:23, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

If there's no reliable references for it, it's not. zubrowka74 16:39, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Ambient black metal

It was suggested I bring this to this talk page. Given that "black ambient" was deleted at AfD way back when, I'm not sure exactly what this is doing on this page. Can anyone provide even a single source discussing "ambient black metal" as a legitimate subgenre? I know all of the bands listed, so I know what you're talking about, but a quick look through Google didn't seem to throw up any reliable sources. Anyone got any? If not, I'll go ahead and remove it as unsourced original research. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

In my experience, anyone who listens to black metal has been aware of this style. It also seems to be frequently discussed/requested on extreme metal forums, with a Google search throwing up ~80,100 results. It goes without saying that reliable sources are scarce for anything black-metal-related – the main reason being that it's an underground genre. Give it some time and I'm sure we can come up with something. ~Asarlaí 15:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Red & Anarchist Black Metal section

I've removed the section because I think the term is a neologism. The one source for the term itself is unreliable and not really a source. Of course there are black metal bands with anarchist or communist themes, but that doesn't make it its own genre. Also, am I the only one who has a problem with those two terms together? Sure, anarcho-communism exists but, for the most part anarchy and communism are two very separate ideas. Most bands that espouse those ideas are going to talk about one or the other not both. That would be rare. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 02:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The term actually is an allusion to the Red and Anarchist Skinheads. While the latter are relevant, the “RABM” term isn’t, although there seems to be a community for it (including this weblog). --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

First of all, we're talking about ideologies, not genres. About the anarcho-communism thing, thats is just your opinion. It is not up to us to pick a name for this new black metal scene. I don't know who came up with this term, but I have read interviews of some anarcho and communist bm bands using this term with not problems. I saw some users adding this section and I think it is proper to acknowledge this "RABM" scene because, politally, black metal it is not just nazism. --Kmaster (talk) 02:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying. I know that that was my opinion. That's not why I removed the section. I was just commenting on the weirdness of that. I removed it because I just don't think there are reliable sources for what you are saying with all respect. I've never heard of the RABM scene and I get that that may just be me, but like I said, the sources. I definitely agree with you that black metal is not just nazism. Far from it. Most black metal fans do not share fascist ideals. That's just a very small community. I'd even go so far as to say that most black metal fans are anti-fascist and anti-nazi. Some of the bigger themes within black metal is misanthropy, chaos, freedom and individualism. Fascism goes against all that. Nazism is all order and intolerance. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 02:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not Kmaster, but I'll reply here. I certainly agree with almost all of what you've said above; though I don't see any problems with the "Red & Anarchist Black Metal" term. It's just like "Red and Anarchist Skinheads" (which can relate both to redskins and anarcho-skins). If the "RABM" term is a neologism and should be avoided - well, let it be so, but I don't see any reasons why even the brief mentions of RABM bands should be deleted. At least we have sources for them (and NOT only webzines and myspaces). Black Kronstadt (talk) 21:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

The term just isn’t relevant; and besides, politics aren’t Black Metal. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

i started the section RABM. a similar section already exists in Spanish Wikipedia and anyone can go and see that i didnt create it. i might only have added information there. on the reasons for the inclusion of this section i think enough has been said by black kronstadt and kmaster and even by the same person who erased it in the first place who recognizes such bands. anyway ill try to add more references to streghten the reliability of the information there.--Eduen (talk) 07:44, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

It's a neologism; you've added it twice, under two different names, which I think is a pretty strong indication that the term is not in widespread usage. The "sources" you've included consist of Myspace and Blogspot, neither of which would ever pass WP:RS. You need something in a print magazine or book, published by an independent, third-party source distinct from the bands. There *are* some websites that pass WP:RS, but that doesn't include any of the metal webzines out there. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 09:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Even Encyclopaedia Metallum? There are over 10000 links to it, so I guess it's widely used as a reliable source. Same for Acronym Finder. Black Kronstadt (talk) 02:28, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Metal Archives should never be used as a source. I'll set about getting rod of those you've mentioned shortly. Ditto for Acronym Finder. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 10:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

well i can accept the criticism of those kind of references. now i hope you dont believe i invented that thing. just putting red and anarchist black metal in google you will get a lot of different pages from different places talking about it in those exact terms. If you put National Socialist Black Metal you will get similar references as far as "reliability".--Eduen (talk) 05:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I see nothing in Google that would pass WP:RS, but if you find anything, please feel free to bring it here (preferably to the talk page first). Regarding the National Socialist black metal page, whilst there are many problems with that page (most of it is original research synthesis, for instance), it still contains many reliable sources to demonstrate its notability. "RABM" has nothing; like I said, you really need some print sources... music magazines and the like (not fanzines! Proper, commercially published ones!) are the way forward. If those don't exist, then the subgenre isn't notable enough to be worth mentioning, even in passing. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 13:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

No offence, but your version of a RABM section is certainly worse than mine. Your edits doesn't even mention such well-known bands as Panopticon or Sorgsvart, and the only links you had are the Myspace and Blogspot links. Of course blogs aren't reliable sources (even if it's my blog :)). However, I still can't understand why the bands' interviews and their official websites aren't reliable sources. The subgenre in question is fundamentally uncommercial, so I think it would be very hard to find any mentions of RABM in commercial magazines. But I've read Wikipedia:Anarchism referencing guidelines and it clearly states that articles on anarchism-related topics are likely to rely more heavily on self-published sources (fanzines, etc.) than would be acceptable for most other Wikipedia articles. At least I see there are no problems with references to Profane Existence, which is an uncommercial fanzine too. Black Kronstadt (talk) 02:28, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

i guess we could start by readding the section on leftist and anarchist black metal avoiding the neologism RABM as the title of the section (which doesnt mean it couldnt be mentioned inside the section. In spanish wikipedia they titled it "anarchist and communist black metal". As far as references what black kronstadt suggests are good solutions. Editing anarchism realted articles i have found those kinds of problems. Black Metal on itself is a very underground and anticommercial kind of music and worse if it is leftist or anarchist. For example in the article Punk ideologies they have small sections on adherence to specific ideologies across the political spectrum from nazi punk to anarchist punk. If the black metal article already has a section on ideology, it must talk about leftist and anarchist bands just as it speaks about fascist bands or apolitical bands. I guess a section on "satanism" might also be a good inclusion on the ideologies section and in some web forum on RABM i heard there is some band or people speaking of "anarcho satanism". Maybe also neopaganism. Of course anarcho-satanism might need some more good references to be mentioned (who knows? i might be able to find it in an interview) but the existence of leftist and anarchist black metal bands, i think cannot continue to go unmentioned in this article.--Eduen (talk) 08:57, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

f it's so "fundmentally uncommercial" as to not be mentioned in print magazines, then there's not a snowball's chance that it's notable enough for a mention on Wikipedia. Don't really care about the "anarchism project referencing guidelines", as they have nothing to do with Wikipedia policy. Find sources that pass WP:RS or stop wasting everyone's time. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 10:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, WP:ANCITE is Wikipedia policy. Zazaban (talk) 19:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I need to apologize for not so carefully reading Wikipedia:RS, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Gaming_the_system before - it could save our time indeed, because now it's clear for me why you're wrong. First of all, there are no rules that impose the mandatory use of the commercial print media for references - neither in Wikipedia:RS, nor in Wikipedia:Notability. Furthermore, it's clear that electronic media are acceptable, as long they have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy: "Electronic media may also be used, subject to the same criteria" - Wikipedia:SOURCES. Same for non-commercial zines and other self-published sources - they aren't ultimately banned by any rule, but: "Similarly, some self-published sources may be acceptable if substantial independent evidence for their reliability is found" - Wikipedia:Verifiability. Well, I can understand some of these policies in a wrong way since my knowledge of English is far from perfect, but there is one more strong proof of my correctness:

"Example related to WP:RS: "Source X is not sufficiently credible for this article on music – the author doesn't have any peer reviewed papers in a music journal!" More generally, this example shows removal or marginalizing of notable viewpoints (breach of WP:NPOV) on the grounds that the cited sources do not meet the editor's named standard [even though they do meet the communal standard]. Wikipedia:Reliable sources anticipates that reliable sources with differing levels of reliability and provenance may coexist, and that reliable verifiable sources of reference material will often be available from different types of source, not just one or two preferred by a particular editor. Not every notable view on music is documented in a music journal; not every notable view on scientific topics is documented in science journals"

- Wikipedia:Gaming the system. That's exactly our case. You're definitely following an overly strict interpretation of the policy, which is against the guidelines. Black Kronstadt (talk) 23:23, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Nobody is "gaming the system", and whilst some electronic sources are acceptable per WP:RS (you'll note the hundreds of references I've added to, say, list articles from Allmusic, MusicMight and Google Books links), Blogspot and Myspace don't pass muster. You've yet to name even a single RABM band that woul qualify for an article under core WP:N guidelines, so how you can claim this "subgenre" is notable is beyond me. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 10:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, Iskra (band) and Wolves in the Throne Room already have articles, and they both are considered RABM. Yes, these articles are poorly sourced, but I can't see any notability problems with them. I'm not sure about Panopticon or Skagos, but Sorgsvart is certainly notable enough for an article (judging from WP:MUSIC guidelines). And BTW, Kmaster's version of a RABM section haven't any Myspace or Blogspot links (it even haven't any EM links). Moreover, what about Justin Davisson's paper "Extreme Politics and Extreme Metal: Strange Bedfellows or Fellow Travelers?" (you can get the PDF here)? There are mentions of some RABM bands (namely WITTR, Sorgsvart, Order of the Vulture, Fall of the Bastards, Timebomb and Blood of Martyrs), and I guess it's a reliable academic publication. Black Kronstadt (talk) 04:39, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

As those bands aren’t Satanic, they do for sure not play Black Metal. Besides, it is new to me that Wolves in the Throne Room’s albums feature socialist or anarchist lyrics or manifestos (similar discussion: de:Diskussion:Wolves in the Throne Room#Streichung der „linken“ und „ganz andere“ Äußerungen). --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Struggling to find sources describing WIITR as "RABM", although the fact that they're anarchists seems well-established; it's the existence of RABM as an established and legitimate subgenre that is in question and I personally can't find any evidence of this. The academic reference is certainly very interesting and I shall read it thoroughly later (although it also does not use the phrase "RABM"), but I've never come across the ID Press, so have no idea whether they was WP:RS; shall look ito. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:54, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

I've never heard nor read the RABM, but that could be because I live in Tasmania... I have definately read WITTR referred to as Eco-Black Metal, both in print (Unrestrained issue 36 pg. 36) and on the WITTR site in the past but it appears that particular Artist Statement has been removed. I believe that the term was invented by the band to refer to themselves - making it a Peacock Term? ZWM (talk) 10:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I've asked a question about Inter-Disciplinary Press here. Looks like the other paper from that page is a reliable source, and the paper by J.Davisson isn't obviously unreliable, but it may depend on how respected he is as a commentator on this subject. Additionally, I've asked the same question about Acronym Finder, but nobody could give me the answer. For me it is a reliable source, since WP:RS accepts electronic media that have enough editorial oversight. If it isn't, then we can call it just "anarchist black metal" (like it was done in Russian and Spanish Wikipedias), without mentioning "RABM" at all.Black Kronstadt (talk) 00:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Still nowhere near enough to satisfy either WP:N or WP:RS for a music article. You need multiple sources from, essentially, commercial print media. No-one doubts that leftist black metal bands exist; however, there's no evidence that it's remotely notable as a subgenre. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 23:45, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. As the one who started this thread years ago, I now realize I was somewhat wrong. No, it's not really a subgenre, but it is definitely an ideological movement that is gaining momentum and notoriety within the black metal scene, mostly as a counterpoint to NSBM. Although there is a tendency for RABM bands to add punk (especially crust punk) elements in to their music. Navnløs (talk) 22:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Atmospheric Black Metal and Depressive Black Metal

Depressive Black Metal (DBM) is a new form of Black Metal. Me and many other people don't accept to put DBM Bands into Ambient Black Metal/Black Ambient. Also need a new section for Atmospheric Black Metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.158.69.58 (talk) 08:22, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

It's called "Depressive Suicidal Black Metal" (DSBM). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.216.149 (talk) 11:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. And DSBM != "Ambient Black Metal". Black Kronstadt (talk) 22:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

It's not exactly the same. Musically, they have a fair bit in common. However, the vocals of DSBM tend to be more 'extreme' (i.e., shrieked) and the lyrical content is often much darker. I think it's worth addressing more in depth at least as a major subgenre of black/ambient, if not as its own genre. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 04:18, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Find a source and feel free to include. If you can't, don't. Simple, really. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:30, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, what do you members of the local edit mafia consider to be a reliable source? Don't link me to some guidelines page; they don't address the issue adequately. I can find a number blogs and such which regard DSBM as a genre. But the thing is, you all don't seem to agree with them. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 20:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Books discussing the subject, news articles, major reviews etc. No blogs. Nymf _hideliho! 22:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Blogs aren't going to cut it. Find an article or interview published by a reliable source such as a music web site, and we'll consider it. Whether we agree with them or not isn't the issue, the issue is whether it's a reliable source and not the opinion of a small group. Somebody tried to add a section on it yesterday, and all it did was describe black metal in general and in no way differentiated it from "DSBM". rzrscm (talk) 23:01, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Eco black metal?

At some point, "eco black metal" was added to the Stylistic divisions section. However, the one source provided is an interview with Wolves in the Throne Room in which they describe their music as part of an "eco-black metal consciousness". I really do not think that this is a reliable enough source to keep this fringe genre around in the article. The blurb as it stands sounds very crufty ("Cascadian Black Metal scene"?). As such, am am going to boldly remove this bit from the article. If anyone disputes this, please discuss. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:48, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

• I totally agree. Someone just added it and I was not removing it because I thought there was some agreement about it. Feel free and revert it. Vater-96 (talk) 20:02, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's not a subgenre. There is a movement within the black metal scene by a number of newer bands (moslty influenced by WitTR) that are more environmentally concious and eschew other more traditional "evil" lyrics in favor of nature-oriented lyrics and play in an atmospheric style (again very infl. by WitTR). Not really a subgenre, though. Just a bunch of bands really infl. by WitTR who are trying to start their own black metal movement which has basically lost its teeth in favor of a more indie-hippie direction. Not that I'm saying that's a bad thing, or a good thing. It just is. Navnløs (talk) 22:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Unblack metal/ Christian black metal

A section should be added (probably under ideology section under NSBM) about unblack metal. Navnløs (talk) 02:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Wasn't there a section about tis at some point ? Perhaps it was deleted. zubrowka74 16:57, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know, but there definitely should be a section for this. Navnløs (talk) 05:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Ha, I was right, here it is. It was deleted by this edit without any explaination. Objections to its reinstatement ? zubrowka74 16:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely not. Should never have been removed. Navnløs (talk) 09:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Subgenres according to Rate Your Music

From Rate Your Music (RYM: Black Metal Black Metal:

    Atmospheric Black Metal
    Depressive Black Metal
    Melodic Black Metal
    Pagan Black Metal
    Symphonic Black Metal

I think Depressive Black Metal and Atmospheric Black Metal are well known subgenres. Gazaneh (talk) 08:34, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Rate Your Music is not a reliable source.--SabreBD (talk) 08:57, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

What about "Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazaneh (talk • contribs) 09:29, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

No, because the staff isn't professional, and the content is user generated in any case.--¿3family6 _contribs 11:09, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Progressive Black Metal as a page here?

Should the people here on Wikipedia have a page for progressive black metal? There is more and more bands that are popping up that are becoming that, or they are evolving to that particular genre in general. It is not a original research, I know that by listening to it, for about six months now. I thought there was supposed to be a page on this particular page, but of course, the people have to argue on the genre--and they do not get a page under way, because of what the "true" genre is supposed to be... Just like the progressive death metal and the technical death metal page[s] that are separate, for once on Wikipedia; it will never happen to that because the people are too lazy to define of what they it is actually, and they just state what the music has in store for them, in their own opinion. Like this, for example: "Extreme progressive jazz-blues black metal." What is that supposed to be in general when people do that? I know that you are supposed to listen to the music, but really?... Furthermore, bands like: Opeth (first two albums only), Agalloch, Enslaved, Krallice, Nachtmystium, Virus, Alcest, Sigh, Sunn O))), Arcturnus, Deathspell Omega, Drudkh, Oranssi Pazuzu, Cobalt and Negura. Those are prime examples of bands that I can find as a source for progressive black metal, without the "original research" label that Wikipedia implies for them. panicpack121 17:54, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you have reliable, second-party sources that describe such a genre? If not, then it is original research and will not be included. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:59, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I have links that I have found, but I don't know if that they're actually reliable, you get what I'm saying? Here are the links--just tell me if they are not up to Wikipedia code or they are up to Wikipedia code and whatnot:

Opeth: http://www.opethforum.com/showthread.php?t=10736 - progressive black metal

       http://www.metalstorm.net/pub/review.php?review_id=25 - progressive black metal, folk.

Agalloch: http://inrevu.com/album-review-agalloch-marrow-of-the-spirit/ - progressive black metal, atmospheric black metal.

         http://www.npr.org/2010/12/02/131192147/first-listen-agalloch-marrow-of-the-spirit - progressive black metal, folk, atmospheric black metal, doom. 

         http://www.metalunderground.com/news/details.cfm?newsid=61571 - progressive black metal

Enslaved: http://downloadsatan.blogspot.com/2011/08/enslaved-sleeping-gods-ep-2011.html - progressive black metal, viking metal.

         http://keepitmetal.com/keep-it-metal/enslaved-axioma-ethica-odini-2010-review/ - progressive black metal, viking metal.
         http://www.prog-sphere.com/tag/progressive-black-metal/ - progressive black metal

Krallice: http://equivoke-mdl.blogspot.com/2011/04/krallice-diotima-2011.html - progressive black metal

         http://treblezine.com/reviews/3755-Krallice_Diotima.html - progressive black metal, doom, grindcore, experimental.
         http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/13840-dimensional-bleedthrough/ - progressive black metal, math rock.
         http://www.syffal.com/album-review-krallice-diotima - progressive black metal, black metal.
         http://avantgarde-metal.com/content/reviews2.php?id=619 - progressive black metal, experimental, progressive, avant-garde.

Nachtmyscism: http://www.maelstrom.nu/ezine/review_iss46_3307.php?sid==&page_rs=5&osCsid== - progressive black metal, melodic black metal, psychedelic, black metal, progressive rock

             http://thephoenix.com/boston/music/108302-nachtmystium-black-metal-psych-out/ - progressive black metal, psychedelic, black metal.

Virus: http://www.thegorgon.com/virus-the-agent-that-shapes-the-desert-2011/ - progressive black metal, avant-garde black metal, post-black metal, experimental black metal.

      http://diabolicalconquest.com/reviews/virus-the_black_flux.htm - progressive black metal, post-black metal, jazz.

Alcest: http://heavymetal.about.com/od/a/gr/alcest-ecaillesdelune.htm - progressive black metal, shoegaze, post-black metal, psychedelic.

       http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=5038 - experimental, post-black metal, black metal, trance, progressive black metal.

Sigh: http://blackmetal.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&catid=10:audio&id=815:Sigh-Ghastly-Funeral-Theatre&Itemid=12 - black metal, folk, progressive, doom, ambient, classical, experimental.

     http://www.seaoftranquility.org/reviews.php?op=showcontent&id=11199 - progressive, experimental black metal, black metal, avant-garde, atmospheric black metal.

Sunn O))): http://lightdarknesslight.blogspot.com/2011/01/sunn-o-black-one.html - progressive black metal, drone, doom, ambient, black metal.

         http://www.amazon.com/Black-One-Sunn/dp/B000NVL0BY - progressive, doom, black metal, sludge, ambient, doom.

Arcturnus: http://brainwashed.com/weddle/reviews/adc.html - progressive black metal, black metal, electronic.

          http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1255 - extreme technical prog metal, black metal, 

Deathspell Omega: http://www.sputnikmusic.com/bands/Deathspell-Omega/6013/ - black metal, progressive metal.

                 http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=4243 - technical/avant-garde black metal, black metal, progressive, experimental, ambient/post black metal.

Drudkh: http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=4833 - progressive black metal, folk metal, technical/extreme prog metal, black metal.

       http://www.powerofmetal.dk/reviews11/drudkh_rereleases_review.htm - progressive black metal, folk, black metal.

Oranssi Pazuzu: http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=4947 - black metal, progressive, experimental/post-rock/metal, psychedelic rock, avant-garde, krautrock.

               http://www.loadown.org/2011/07/oranssi-pazuzu-muukalainen-puhuu-2009.html - ambient, black metal, psychedelic, progressive, atmospheric black metal.

Cobalt: http://www.popmatters.com/pm/review/71416-cobalt-gin - black metal, progressive, hardcore punk, crust punk.

          http://thechiefcommie.blogspot.com/2010/01/cobalt-gin.html - black metal, progressive.
       http://heavymetal.about.com/od/cdreviews/fr/cobaltgin.htm - avant-garde, experimental, black, sludge, doom, hardcore. 

Negura: http://www.metalkingdom.net/band/833_negur_bunget - progressive, folk, atmospheric black metal.

       http://swordchant.go-board.com/t256-atmospheric-prog-black-metal-negura-bunget - atmospheric/progressive black metal, folk.
       http://www.sputnikmusic.com/bands/Negura-Bunget/6232/ - black metal (early), atmosphere black metal, progressive black metal, folk.

There is the links to that. Try to see if it is verifiable for Wikipedia. panicpack121 2:33, 13 September 2011 (UTC).

The only reliable sources in that list are About.com, The Boston Phoenix, Pitchfork Media, National Public Radio, and Popmatters (these are all excellent!). For progressive black metal, the About.com review only says "progressive," not "progressive black metal," so using that as a ref is original synthesis, Pitchfork Media and Popmatters are the same way, and NPR only mentions chord progressions, which has nothing to do with the style of metal at all. The Phoenix source is actually a good case for mentioning psychedelic black metal, as it actually discusses what psychedelic black metal is, instead of just slapping the label on a band. Anyway, that's my verdict.--¿3family6 _contribs 15:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, man for that. It took me awhile to find links for the genre of progressive black metal--but still, I thank you for telling me if they are actually verifiable or not. panicpack121 19:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Generally, you want something that is not self-published, that is written by a professional, and, depending on the source in question, editorial oversight. WP:RS should help you get an idea. Glad to help.--¿3family6 _contribs 01:55, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, we can ignore all of the webzines. None of the others talk about "progressive black metal" as a genre. We had the same issue years ago with "melodic black metal" and "brutal death metal". The adjectives are simply being used as descriptors, not as evidence of a separate musical subgenre; you would need reliable sources talking about the "subgenre" in detail in and of itself. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 20:43, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Blackgaze / Black metal with shoegaze?

Would this be relevant within this article? Bands like Alcest and others would fit in this. I'm sure there's plenty of written material out there on this offshoot of both genres. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.205.241.200 (talk) 01:37, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

If you could provide references to that written material, then it would be relevant. Make sure that the material meets the requirements of reliability though.--¿3family6 _contribs 03:47, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

The name "Blackgaze" is only used by the websites like Rate Your Music. This fusion genre has black metal, post-metal (post-black metal), and shoegaze elements (shoegaze black metal). Winter Gaze (talk) 05:27, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I never read the term “Blackgaze” before today, but those bands may be included if written material is provided. Most of those bands don’t actually play Black Metal, though; as I stated above: Rotting Christ, Mayhem, Archgoat and others had no common style, yet were considered Black Metal bands due to their Satanic background. Non-Satanic bands used other terms back then, because their music was and is therefore not Black Metal. --217/83 14:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

It's a common genre in the metal music since 2010. Blackgaze is a name that used by some metal music fans, But it's not a common or accepted genre name. Bands like Alcest perform this type of music. People call this music: shoegaze black metal, shoegaze post-black metal, shoegaze post-metal, ..., and finally Blackgaze! But in my opinion; Alcest-ish music and sound is post-metal with shoegazing (or shoegazing with post-metal) plus some black metal elements. Current Alcest works and similar bands fit into the post-metal and shoegaze category. Winter Gaze (talk) 14:41, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

You can even have black-country chamber music or electro-deathwave, as long as it's referenced by reliable sources. zubrowka74 18:26, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes. exactly. I agree with you. Blackgaze/Shoegaze black metal is a new term/name and if it has usage in the reliable sources, we can use it in the Wikipedia. This new term is something like "depressive black metal" or "atmospheric black metal". They are common in the metal community and fans, but not in the professional reviews or websites like Allmusic. Winter Gaze (talk) 19:04, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

1st wave of black metal???

Black metal used to mean any group that sung Satanic lyrics. The oposite being white metal which was groups that sung lyrics about the Bible. When Venom released the album "Black metal" it was reference to it being evil / satanic.

Its like saying Helloween are first wave Death Metal as they appeared on an album titled "Death Metal". Everyone knows Helloween aren't Death metal the same way everyone remembers Venom were part of the NWOBHM. Venom sound more like Motorhead only with poorer recording quality and production - Motorhead were a much bigger band with bigger label support.

The relatively new genre taking the name "Black Metal" evolved from Death Metal groups who took a large influence from groups like Venom. Black metal as a genre / sub-genre of extreme metal music started not with Venom etc but was started much later and was greatly influenced by Venom etc.

Quote: Wikipedia "White Metal"

"Eric Wagner himself has commented on marketing the band as white metal:

It was Metal Blade. Back then they called all of it ´Black Metal´, y´know, Slayer, Danzig, etc., all those bands, they are ´Black Metal´, so I didn't grow up believing in all that crap and I think that people didn't believe in it either. It was a question about marketing your band in some way, so I had to do it. So I did this. Metal Blade called us as a “White Metal band” and I just wished they didn't.[3]"

End Quote

I was around then and I read all the magazines (internet wasn't around so we all read the magazines to get the latest info) and I went to many metal clubs and concerts. As Eric puts it is exactly as I remember it. Those trying to say it was a genre were obviously not around at the time. Metalosaurus (talk) 17:59, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

• The above comment wasn't signed, so I have to bold-text all my opinions.
• Black metal was born before death metal. Venom was NWOBHM, that's correct. Venom was also a black metal band, "early black metal" to be specific. Early black metal does sound very different from later black metal, but it was still black metal.
• Helloween isn't death metal. Venom is black metal. Venom is black metal not because they released an album called "Black Metal", but because they really are black metal. Slayer's lyrics were satanic, that doesn't make them black metal. Slayer is thrash metal.

Pagen HD (talk) 10:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

There are sources around to prove Slayer’s music was called Black Metal the same way Venom’s was (old important fanzines), and people who define Black Metal as beginning with Euronymous defining it, who therefore see Venom, Hellhammer and other first wave bands as just precursors and not Black Metal bands. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Type in bold as much as makes you feel good, lol. (I have edited the top comment to also use bold my main points - and have signed it) If you are able to read the quote / remark made by Troubles singer 'Eric Wagner' then you will notice he is referring to how it was back in those days. I was there and it is exactly as I remember it. Venom started the term "Black Metal" and it was not seen as a genre but a reference to 'Satanic Metal'. Just as Trouble were seen as "White Metal". Trouble were not Christians anymore than groups such as Slayer were satanic. Its just the name that was being used by the fans and the magazines. Eric Wagner was commenting on how "White Metal" evolved - as an opposite to "Black Metal". If "Black Metal" back in the 80s & early 90s didn't refer to satanic metal then WTF is "White Metal" and how did it come around??!! It seems very strange and if not way toooo coincidental that white is the opposite to black and white metal came after black metal. Isn't also strange how people around at the time (including Eric Wagner) remember black metal as satanic / satanic themed metal and white metal as Christian / biblical themed metal?!! When the genre now referred to as "Black Metal" came around it was made by much later groups who were raised on genres such Death Metal as much as they were influenced by NWOBHM groups such as Venom and their sound was a combination of the two.

Yes obviously Slayer are obviously thrash and it is a good illustration that early death metal quote them as a major influence. Many early death metal groups sound very much like Slayer only a little slower and with the classic death growl. Similarities can be drawn in sound between Slayer and the later inspired groups but this does not make Slayer Death Metal though does it? Metallica were majorly inspired by Motorhead and songs like Phantom Lord off of Kill em all sound just like Motorhead. This does does not make Motorhead "thrash metal" does it? Please this is supposed to be an online encyclopedia based on fact and not peoples opinions. Please use and observe facts like Eric Wagner's quotes. - I can vouch that I personally remember it this way. I can remember reading magazines articles on both black metal and white metal (there was no internet back then so the everyone read the magazine to find out what was new out). Someone must have record of these many articles etc. Metalosaurus (talk) 19:40, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

In addition to this Eric Wagner's group Trouble was part of Metal blade records and he is quoting how they originally marketed the term "White Metal" as an opposite to "Black Metal" (which obviously meant 'satanic themed metal'). They wouldn't have definetely been aware of what the terminology in the metal music world would have been seen as by the masses at the time. There was no such thing. Black Metal back then meant something different. The so called second wave is when Black Metal started as a genre. Death Metal bands combined their influence & sound with groups like Venom to make the newer sounding genre" Metalosaurus (talk) 20:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Not really. Bands such as Rotting Christ, Mayhem and Archgoat had no common style, yet were considered Black Metal bands due to their Satanic background. Non-Satanic bands used other terms back then, because their music was and is therefore not Black Metal. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Mayhem De Mysteriis Dom Sathanas.ogg

The image Image:Mayhem De Mysteriis Dom Sathanas.ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:DawnOfTheBlackHearts.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Ideology

2008

I've reorganised the ideology section. Some elements had been overemphasised. If anyone wants to contest this, feel free to revert it and state your case here. Dark Prime (talk) 20:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Although some of the information you added was relevant and useful, a lot of it wasn't. First, there are a number of statements that are either vague or in need of sources. I pointed these out in my last edit. Second, I think the section now focuses way too much on Euronymous. Although he might have been an influential musician, he's still just one (dead) man whose views weren't shared by anyone else in the scene. This section should focus on the views of the majority. I'm going to edit the section accordingly, and you can let me know what you think. ~Asarlaí 17:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Euronymous raised the Norwegian scene and influenced its ideology (this can be sourced, too), you can’t focus too much on him. He is not “still just one (dead) man whose views weren't shared by anyone else in the scene”. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I suppose I can understand that I might have exaggerated the role of Euronymous, but at the same time I have the following reservations:

• Hostility to Christianity is too narrow (given that there are also anti-Islam bands etc.), and hostility to 'organised religion in general' is too broad. Strictly speaking, 'organised religion' also encompasses Church of Satan among others, and there's no doubting that there are BM musicians who support such organisations. Hence I feel 'Right-Hand Path' is a better description.
• Placing atheism, Paganism and Satanism in the same sentence like that has contradictory tones (Theistic Satanism is certainly not atheistic, Satanism=/=Paganism etc.).
• I suppose its still worth stressing that BM musicians have had different reasons for their hosility to Christianity: from Satanists like Euronymous to Pagans/nationalists like Vikernes. I included Eric D's remarks on nationalism (which I forgot to cite, although it is in the same link as the Satanist one) because I feel the nationalist angle is exaggerated due to people like him, Euronymous and Infernus as well as the opinions of Ihsahn - who said that the sentiment from the 1990s developed from 'hostility towards society' etc. (also shared by Infernus).
• I believe the frontman of Judas Iscariot is a bona fide nihilist.

I'm not sure if I've got all my books in balance at the moment, but I look forward to a response. Dark Prime (talk) 20:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Members of the Norwegian scene rejected the Church of Satan, and back then, Vikernes claimed to be a Satanist. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Right-Hand Path is an esoteric term (even its mention said that some of the religion in question was known as Right-hand Path to some) and it is unsuitable in the context of this passage. It might be clearer to refer specifically to Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, or, the Abrahamic faiths. Right-Hand Path implies Left-Hand affiliation, however, those who reject Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, from either a polytheist, or racialist, or nationalist, position are hardly aligning themselves with something "left-hand" or, "malicious", or "sinful", but quite the opposite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.26.216.65 (talk) 03:59, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

2011

I insist on Satanism being mentioned at this section’s very beginning. People who have never heard of Black Metal should know that is what the term originally was used for, the (wrong) idea to use the term for Pagan, secular, atheist, nihilist or whatever bands without any connection to Satanism, if they “sound Norwegian”, came after the second wave. Creating a new section for Satanism was okay though, I just disagree with the complete removal, for reasons mentioned above.

Asarlaí asked for the exact quote from the Emperor interview I refer to, being “fairly sure this view wasn't held by *everyone* in the scene”. It was stronger than you seem to believe, but it is correct that it wasn’t “held by *everyone* in the scene”. Here you are. Faust was asked what he considers to be the definition of Black Metal and whether he considered the LaVeyan way and bands that follow it, like Necromantia, to be wrong and not to play Black Metal; he replied that the Satanic lyrics are important, and what some people believe to be the musical definition fits some bands, but that doesn’t mean Black Metal bands have to sound like this (he names Blasphemy, Death SS, Mayhem and Mercyful Fate as examples). And for LaVey, direct quote: “And yes, it is wrong to call bands who follow the path of Anton LaVey for Black Metal. Those who have read the 'Satanic' bible know that LaVey stands for everything that's good in life and the worship of all kinds of pleasures […]. This has absolutely nothing to do with the classical and original form of Satanism (whom the Christians presented). Satanism is a religion on the same level as Christianity and LaVey says that his philosophy is anti religion and he also says you have to be an atheist to be a Satanist. I mean, what's the point? He scorns the old traditional way of Satanism. LaVey and his followers hate Christianity because they are so evil while they (the Satanists) are the good ones. He want's [sic!] to make sure that Satanism gets a good reputation and that it can become something acceptable And this is exactly how it is not meant to be. When people hear the word Satanism they freeze on their backs and they shall be really afraid of the Satanists, who sacrifice children in the name of Satan. The Church of Satan is the complete opposite of this. They are only a family club who wanna make sure that people get the best out of their earthly lives and nothing more than that. About the last question....I don't really think NECROMANTIA label themselves as Black Metal and personally I have never done that, because I think the term Occult/Dark Metal suits them better. They are among my fave bands and each time I listen to I get the impression of something dark and occult. It's not like the feeling you get when you listen to the average Church of Satan band, it is something completely different, something dark, frightening and mystic. Something unknown.” (Emperor. In: Jon Kristiansen: Metalion: The Slayer Mag Diaries. Brooklyn, NY: Bazillion Points Books 2011, p. 274.)

I had stated that Varg Vikernes rejected LaVeyan Satanism, too (besides, this can be seen on the Aske EP’s back cover). In this review, Vikernes claims that “everyone in the Norwegian Black Metal scene regarded Anton LaVey as a ridiculous fool, if they indeed even know who in Earth he was”. I also expect everyone here to know that Vikernes claimed to be a Satanist before he murdered Euronymous and became known for his crude Pagan Nazi ideology (and to know about the lies he has spread since he murdered Euronymous). To quote from this interview from Faust’s Orcustus fanzine: “So-called Church of Satan is not in my views a church of Satan...It's rather a humanistic individualistic organisation who worship happiness and life (for them it's only this life).” There are other quotes from old interviews available, but I am too lazy to look for these now (if anyone actually needs some more, I will give add some more quotes). Metalion doubts Vikernes ever was serious about Satanism, by the way: “First, the churches started to burn in June 1992, beginning with Fantoft stave church on the outskirts of Bergen. Within a couple weeks, Varg Vikernes told us at the Helvete store that he had done it. He made the arson sound like nothing special. He had already been to Stockholm and left the burning threats on Christofer Johnsson of Therion’s door. Even that had seemed like something he did to impress Euronymous. Though he called Therion “life metal” for their early political lyrics, I never saw Varg as a dedicated Satanist. If anything, the Therion guys were probably more serious about occult things than Varg ever was, but that’s not something that can scientifically be gauged. […] Truthfully, some people in our scene read a few books and considered themselves Satanists. In Varg’s case, I wouldn’t say it was much deeper than that. Then he got into some very strange politics, dabbling in Fascism and National Socialism, but he seemed to change his mind all the time.” (Jon Kristiansen: Metalion: The Slayer Mag Diaries, p. 261f.) By the way, at least by now, the Therion members actually are more serious about that than Vikernes ever was, having Thomas Karlsson write lyrics and Ofermod member Belfagor contribute vocals (Din on the last album Sitra Ahra) and considering Therion to be a Black/Death Metal band (source for that statement), and Johnsson being a Dragon Rouge member.

To confirm that the view was not “held by *everyone* in the scene”, although it was very strong: EsoTerra showed interest in Black Metal and asked Ihsahn, who held Social Darwinist views, what he thought about LaVey and the Church of Satan: “Anton LaVey is a very intelligent man. He, with his church, is very good at getting people into the anti-Christian and Satanic concept. Having his ideologies nicely written out to people so that even the simplest housewife can agree with it. Many of his ideas are very good, others I disagree with. But an individual should think for itself.” (Chad Hensley: Legion of the Night. An interview with Emperor. In: EsoTerra, no. 6, 1995.) In Det svarte alvor, Ihsahn said that music can’t be Black Metal if it is not Satanic. It is obvious he differs from other members since he says he doesn’t need to be destructive. In 1994, Thy Kingdom Come asked Nocturno Culto about the “strong anti-La Vey prpaganda 2 years ago in Norway” and his views on the Church of Satan. His reply: “The council wasn't to happy with some of the points of views coming from La Vey and his "disciples"/followers. Norwegian Black Metallers are not too concerned with La Vey's views, it's different form of atmosphere and satanism up here. We don't bother to go against La Vey, who strongly fights jesus anyway.” And when Fenriz was asked about his interpretation of Satanism by Marc Spermeth (Ablaze magazine), he replied: „Ich nehme von jedem ein bißchen, so daß es mir paßt, wie ein Schwanz in der Votze [sic!]. […] Satanismus bedeutet für mich, alle dunklen Seiten anzubeten und zu ehren – und natürlich noch eine Menge mehr.“ (Marc Spermeth: Besessen von der Dunkelheit und dem Bösen. In: Ablaze, no. 5, May/June 1995, p. 10.) That means he takes a bit from everything, so that it fits him, ‘like a cock in the cunt’, and that for him, Satanism means to worship all dark sides ‘and of course a lot more’. I don’t know what Ihsahn, Nocturno Culto and Fenriz say about Satanism nowadays, so if anyone knows, tell me (either here or on my talk page). --217/83 22:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

The line "Black metal was originally used as a term for extreme metal bands with Satanic lyrics" apeers in the article twice: at the start of the "vocals and lyrics" section and at the start of the "Satanism" section. I don't think we need to repeet it a third time! Maybe one of the lines could be moved insted?

Also, when I sayd "I'm fairly sure this view wasn't held by *everyone* in the scene" I ment the view that "only bands who ar Theistic Satanists can be called 'black metal'". So far I'v only found two Norwegians who held this view; Euronymous and Faust.

Anyway, thanks for finding all these quotes. Keep up the good work. ~Asarlaí 23:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I didn’t mean we should use the same line thrice, sorry (if you find a better formulation for one of the two lines we have already, just change it, for some more variation). Moving it might be a good idea; do so the way you suppose it fits, and if there’s still a problem, we will surely be able to solve it.

Okay, I misunderstood that. But still, the non-Satanic Norwegian bands didn’t call their music Black Metal, for obvious reasons; I guess you have heard of “Holocaust Metal” (a term Immortal used back then), Pagan Metal (In the Woods…) and Viking Metal (Enslaved). Do you want/need additional sources for early 1990’s Vikernes holding this view (or at least claiming to)? --217/83 23:29, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I think we should establish (A) which Norwegians calld themselvs Theistic Satanists at the time, (B) which Norwegians held that "only Theistic Satanists can be BM" at the time [i.e. who actually sayd it in interviews] , and (C) which Norwegians calld their music BM at the time. Then we can choose what to put in the article...

Band	A?	B?	C?
Abbath (Immortal)	No	?	No
Blackthorn (Thorns)	?	?	?
Carpathian Forest	?	?	?
Dead (Mayhem)	"I have always been insanely into horror! And when I discovered Satanism I have been insanely interested in that" (see Here)	?	Yes
Demonaz (Immortal)	No (interview in (Det svarte alvor)	?	?
Enslaved	?	?	No, No
Euronymous (Mayhem)	Yes	Yes	Yes
Faust (Emperor)	Yes	Yes	Yes
Fenriz (Darkthrone)	Claimed to be a Satanist at this time but didn’t mention Theistic Satanism (see here)	?	Yes, Yes
Frost (Satyricon)	?	?	Yes
Hades	?	?	?
Hellhammer (Mayhem)	No (his statements on whether he cared about Satanism are contradictory though)	?	?
Ihsahn (Emperor)	Yes, but he didn’t mention Theistic Satanism (Det svarte alvor, EsoTerra)	Yes (Det svarte alvor)	?
Ildjarn	No	Yes	?
Mortiis (Emperor)	?	?	?
Necrobutcher (Mayhem)	?	?	?
Nocturno (Darkthrone)	?	?	Yes, Yes
Samoth (Emperor/Satyricon)	?	?	?
Satyr (Satyricon)	?	?	Yes
Varg (Burzum)	"I did call myself a Satanist in a short period in 1992, but I never was a Satanist" (see Here)	Yes	Yes, Yes

(add to it if you can) ~Asarlaí 03:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

The list is no bad idea, but we shouldn’t forget some bands are considered to be “true” although not all members share the ideology; see statements by Michael W. Ford of Black Funeral (“To play BLACK metal you or at least one member of the band must be practising Satanism. Now if you go down to it, I am sure most or 98% of the bands there would not be a true Black metal band, period! You cant tell me different either.”) and MkM of Antaeus (“You have to hold the banner of darkness high, you have to represent the dark side. I mean, be anything you want, as long as it is "dark and hateful". That could be AntaeuS' motive. We don’t only get along BM people, I get along various people into different stuff, but in all I can feel frustration, anger, darkness, hate, the will to power, all mixed up in a vicious khaos. […] I'm maybe the only one into SataNism within the band, using that term "SataN", but when I get to talk with the others, I feel something I couldn’t feel with others who would pretend to be "evil". […] We do split the work, they compose and make the band evolve, I do represent it. The concept and lyrical approach is mine, thus I do present it better than others.”). Both aren’t Norwegian, but the focus on Norway came since Euronymous influenced the ideology and the ideology issue was also brought up in the article about the Norwegian scene; we shouldn’t forget how important the Swedes were and are, and there were no Pagan bands etc. among the Swedish bands Euronymous supported. Maybe you could add one more column, for some musicians just said they were Satanists, but not that they were Devil worshippers/Theistic Satanists (an example for this would be some newer interviews with Frost i have read although I hate newer Satyricon recordings). I disagree when it comes to Nema being used as a source for Enslaved being a Black Metal band; “The Death Metal Scene Is Dead, Greet The Age Of Black Metal!!” doesn’t mean “Enslaved plays Black Metal” (and the band doesn’t consider Nema to be official). On the contrary, the band insisted on not playing Black Metal and therefore came up with the Viking term: “The category all depends on the lyrics, from my point of view. As long as it is not dealing with satanism or such things. The lyrics describe the music, the music is metal, but our Viking lyrics can explain how we're not black metal, so we use the term "Viking metal". It is not really a category, the category is metal and the Viking stuff is just something with which we've put a label on the music many years ago. That has kind of become a category now. That's not our fault.” (Chronicles of Chaos webzine) And this German interview basically says the same; as did older interviews (which I don’t believe to be online). I know there were flyers with the Viking Metal term back then, but I don’t know whether they can be found online. And the source for Immortal didn’t say “Immortal plays Black Metal” either; in Det svarte alvor, the speaker says Immortal’s music is called “Holocaust Metal” by the band and that the members don’t call themselves Satanists; Demonaz says the members said nothing they didn’t stand for and that Immortal’s lyrics are not about Satan. In this review, Vikernes also wrote Immortal used the “Holocaust Metal” term (and as he said he still considers Demonaz to have been a friend, he might not have lied for once). I have once read this interview with Alexander von Meilenwald (Nagelfar) claiming Demonaz once worshipped the Devil, but I have never read any interview backing that up. Did you? --217/83 06:58, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I can see a small problem here: you are talking about artists considering themselves Black Metal or not but in most articles the genre classification is based on what other sources say about the band, whathever the band's opinion might be. See the whole "Led Zeppelin is Heavy Metal because it has been called so by the press" feud that has been going on and on. zubrowka74 18:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

The goal of this isn't to decide who was/wasn't BM; it's simply to find out what the Norwegian black metalers actually beleved at the time. ~Asarlaí 18:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

It is correct that what a bands says is not the only thing to consider (maybe you know about the idiots who label their Techno or NDH as Industrial). But in does indeed matter if a band’s members say they do not play Black Metal (which they don’t anyway) since this topic is brought up both in the article and on the talk page. The context is important to judge whether it matters how musicians label their music. Agreed? --217/83 19:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Militarism?

Could militarism also be included in the ideology page. I mean, bands like Marduk seem to be very influenced by war and militarism shares some bounderies with nationalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.147.24.49 (talk) 12:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

It could be added, but it will be tough to add it and keep it in a neutral point of view with decent refs. Undeath (talk) 07:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Individualism?

As far as I understand it, Black Metal supports Collectivism far more than it supports Individualism, though, of course, the community that is supported is the "Black Metal scene", or whatever groups bands or musicians may belong to (the "Inner Circle", Les Legions Noires, different countries' individual scenes), rather than a nation, city, neighbourhood, or somesuch community. If we take the Norwegian scene as an example: the Church burnings are an act for the group (or "scene"), not for the individual (though possibly for the individual within the group, as well as for the group itself). I would say that, Black Metal being ostensibly "anti-modernity", at least in its earlier incarnations, a primary message behind the music is that modern society has failed, and that we should revert to systems closer in nature to those of older times, before "Individualism" - that which has now caused this failure of society, the concept that the Individual is greater than the Collective - had come about. ~LR—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.112.166 (talk) 16:11, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Stop being pretentious. You provide no support for your argument; how has individualism caused a social failure in a world of consumerism and mass-media mentality? Also, your pseudo-philosophical rabble does not alter the fact that the ideals advocated by Black Metal are well within the boundaries of individualism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.225.28.159 (talk) 12:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Stop ignoring valid points because they're too far above your head. OP provided support in the form of examples of groups whose philosophies coincide with this suggested 'collectivism'. I think the point is that any 'individualism' in black metal recognises the individual as an important part of the group instead of merely an end in itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.74.116.49 (talk) 08:17, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

This is not a forum. Please take this discussion elsewhere. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 10:21, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

To provide sourced content: Benjamin Hedge Olson’s master thesis states that “Black Metal is characterized by a conflict between radical individualism and group identity and by an attempt to accept both polarities simultaneously” and that this conflict “is one of the defining features of black metal culture”. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Mainstream Popularity

From the number of times i've been on this page. I have seen this changed from Underground - Largely Underground - Low to Underground - And now Moderate in Norway Low to underground elsewhere. I see this weird as this is seen as an unknown genre that most people dont know about. Just because alot of bands come from norway, dosent mean its very popular amongst norwegians. Alot of bands also come from sweden. Im going to change this Underground. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.2.212.116 (talk) 18:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC) I have to agree with the norway thing, but tis definatly not purely underground. I liv ein America and can still walk to walmart and by an Immortal album. And thanks to the internet Black MEtal has spread vastly.

It depends on the band and country. Black metal is said to be Norway's largest cultural export, yet in America, it is still relatively obscure. Some bands such as Archgoat, Beherit or Death Yell are still obscure even to a number of black metal fans, while groups like Satyricon, Immortal and Mayhem have garnered some mainstream attention. In order to properly label black metal's popularity, you have to take into account its overall, worldwide popularity. If one were to do that I think it would still fall in the Low to Underground label. There is scattered knowledge of the genre, essentially. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.142.191.132 (talk) 18:01, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

People who are seriously into Black Metal have heard of Beherit, being one of the most important bands of the early 1990’s. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Right Hand Path

I'm not sure this is really appropriate terminology to be used on this page... I understand what the editor means by the term, but the term is only in extremely fringe use and as such likely to obfuscate rather than clarify the claims in the article. At the moment it is a phrasing being pushed by a solitary editor; few if any theologians recognise the term as legitimate, and as such I suggest we pick different phrasing. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:31, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

• I understand that it is not a common term, but its the only formal term I've seen used to describe religions such as Christianity. Although most black metal bands oppose Christianity, there's been controversy in some circles concerning attitudes towards religions such as Judaism and Islam - and there have been bands who oppose these religions in their music, while some more prominent artists such as Gaahl have spoken out against them, so I feel it is worth mentioning that black metal bands are not solely opposed to Christianity. At the same time, I've also seen 'anti-religious' used inappropriately, considering that many black metal artists practice religious forms of Satanism as well as Paganism among others. I feel the need to use a term that appropriately encompasses Christianity etc. Dark Prime (talk) 12:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I can see your point regarding the general opposition to religions other than Christianity, although I'd argue in general this opposition is trivially covered in comparison. But the main problem is that "Right Hand Path" is not a formal term; I've not come across a consensus amongst theologians to say that it is, or indeed any substantial coverage within the academic field at all - and that is precisely why the term should not be used. We need to be going for accuracy and clarity; the term Right Hand Path helps with neither. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

"Right hand path" seems to refer to what's more commonly described as Ethical Monotheism or the Abrahamic religions. However, I think black metal's general target is Christianity and I'm unsure if there's a great deal of recorded evidence of blasphemy against Judaism or Islam. Aryder779 (talk) 17:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I addressed this issue above and will not repeat myself here except to say that bands who oppose Abrahamic faiths on pagan, or racialist or nationalist, grounds do not fit into the same "Left-Hand Path" definition like Satanists and other degenerates do and so the term is therefore too limited as well as being too esoteric given the context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.26.216.65 (talk) 10:15, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Did you really have to write: “Satanists and other degenerates”? --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Black metal separatism in the early 1990's

Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've read, it seems that a number of Norwegian bands were playing death metal in the late 80's and early 90's (Darkthrone, Mayhem, and in the cases of Immortal and Burzum, under different band names). At that point they began to feel death metal had exhausted its possibilities, so they utilized techniques that directly opposed death metal: dissonance, very little palm muting, more use of traditional chords, tremolo picking between two strings instead of one, a thin guitar tone, etc. I think this is worth mentioning in the second wave section. 66.142.191.132 (talk) 17:52, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Not exactly. Some were considered Death Metal bands back then (like Mayhem), some didn’t exist yet (Vikernes started Burzum in 1991), but you are right in the cases of Immortal and Darkthrone. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

WHERE IS GREEK BLACK METAL SCENE???

Greek black metal scene is small but has a distinctive sound that differs from the rest (norwegian) because of the usage of keyboards which noone had use in those days ( darkthrone). and i think it should at least be mentioned in 2nd wave of black metal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotting_Christ Thats why is called distictively greek. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.167.52.18 (talk) 11:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Plenty of black metal bands use keyboards, it's nothing special - I hardly think Greek black metal is that notable. ≈ The Haunted Angel 11:26, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I don't know... The Greek black metal scene was actually pretty important, with bands like Rotting Christ, Necromantia, Varathron and Kawir. Certainly more internationally notable than, say, Les Legions Noires. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

yes of course they use keyboards but not since late 80s as greek black metals bands.also the riffing is a bit different. more internationally notable than les legions noires and very well known in the underground scene. http://www.chroniclesofchaos.com/articles/rants/6-900_when_hades_strikes.aspx

The Greek Scene is widely regarded as a distinct entity at the beginning of the second wave. If you read issues of Terrorizer or other publications from the time they acknowledge this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.225.28.159 (talk) 12:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DawnOfTheBlackHearts.jpg

Image:DawnOfTheBlackHearts.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 non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.-Andrew c ^[talk] 23:27, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Could someone please fix the rationale for this image? It seems quite stupid that the images are removed by default, rather than being fixed or the uploader being notified. But hey, I don't make the rules. ~Asarlaí 23:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not clear to me why a non-free image is necessary in this case, or else I would have written a fair use rationale myself. I was being bold removing it from the article, but since there are objectors, I'll give them a chance to fix the issue. Sorry to have caused this article trouble, but hopefully the issue will be addressed. Why do you think this image is in line with WP:FUC? I'd be glad to fix the image myself if I'm convinced the image is necessary.-Andrew c ^[talk] 12:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Image has been removed, along with another one. -Andrew c ^[talk] 12:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Cultural origins

Is it appropriate to say that the first wave started in the mid rather than early 1980s, and that the second wave started in Scandinavia? There were plenty of bands outside of Scandinavia and Europe. Dark Prime (talk) 20:28, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

No. I wouldn’t consider Hellhammer’s demos (1983) to be released in the mid 1980’s. You are right about plenty bands outside of Scandinavia and Europe, but Euronymous leading the Norwegian scene and Darkthrone releasing A Blaze in the Northern Sky somehow justify the view of the second wave having started in Scandinavia (though I would prefer people to know about bands like Archgoat and not believing Black Metal to be a Norwegian music style). --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Venom did not coin the term black metal.

One year before Black Metal's release Blue Öyster Cult had a song featured on thier album Fire of Unknown Origin called "Heavy Metal: the Black and Silver.". Albeit Blue Oyster Cult are obvious not a black metal band they were the first to use the term. The song should be mentioned in the article. Rockgenre (talk) 16:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

BOC never used the song title to describe any form of musical style. The song has a science fiction theme. There is no need to mention them anywhere in this article because their song title has nothing to do with the musical style. In the early 1980s before there was definite distinction between the newer extreme heavy styles, the terms black metal, power metal, death metal and thrash metal all meant the exact same thing. It would only depend on which magazine you were reading. Depending on the publication: Metallica was a black metal band and Venom was a death metal band and Anthrax was a power metal band and Motorhead was a thrash metal band. In another magazine those terms would be all switched around for the exact same bands. By the mid-1980s everyone was pretty much on the same page as far as what black, power, death and thrash were. And through all of those years no one ever associated BOC woth any of those newer extreme metal styles. Here endeth your metal history lesson. GripTheHusk (talk) 17:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't associate BOC with extreme metal either, but the song is the first time you hear heavy metal and black come together. I think the song has kind of has a "Born to be Wild" thing about it and by that I mean they were both important in giving genres thier names(even though The Soft Machine came before Born to be Wild), but not really describing a form of music. I think I could at least write something like, "While not the musical precursor to black metal, Blue Oyster Cult's song "Heavy Metal: The Black and Silver" is possibly the origin of the term black metal." Thoughts? Rockgenre (talk) 20:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

This is clearly wrong... BOC did not (to the best of my knowledge) use the phrase "black metal" (with the two words juxtaposed); simply having the words "black" and "metal" in the same title is irrelevant to this article. Regardless, you'd need a reliable source to back up the claim that the song was the origin of the term, rather than idle speculation... this is not a forum, after all. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 20:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with Blackmetalbaz. This association is utterly ridiculous. They never used the term "black metal." That's an important and specific correlation. Just using the two words in the same sentence or line has nothing to do with black metal. I'm sure the words "folk" and "metal" were used in the same sentence hundreds of years ago. Does that have anything to do with the musical genre "folk metal"? No. Maybe you think that because it's a musical reference it means something more. It doesn't. The words are not connected. They are not even referring to a type of music together. Case closed. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 02:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't think of, or find any reference to, a Second Wave BM band citing Blue Oyster Cult as an influence or inspiration. But the mainstays of that scene all point to Venom as a direct influence. ZWM (talk) 10:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Bgcolor

Shouldn't the bgcolor be black? It's an extreme genre of heavy metal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.26.49.48 (talk) 17:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The standard colour for heavy metal is crimson. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 17:11, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

No...That's stereotyping. rzrscm (talk) 22:39, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

This is in reference to your comment: "Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Black metal. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you. This is the second time you have added this information to thr article, in contravention of wp:coi candyworm (talk) 01:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)"

How does adding a legitimate bibliographic entry under Literature heading fall under advertising or promotion? I did not add link, only information about the volume of essays

Nicolamasciandaro (talk) 02:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

_{(Bringing this discussion here from my Talk page as it's of relevance to the article.)}

Please read wp:coi. There is an apparent conflict of interest evident in your addition of a work of which you are the sole editor, in this edit. Given that you already had a similar edit to this article reverted here, it is evident that the addition of this item is not supported by consensus. Please discuss the matter here in order to achieve consensus before adding again. Thank you. --candyworm (talk) 09:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying the process. The book is a significant collection of 13 essays and articles on black metal. See Googlebooks to browse contents. The book was recently reviewed in Wire magazine by Mark Fisher, who wrote that "the essays are all exercises in passionate engagement, intellectual without being dryly academic . . . a book that is an exhilarating example of how to write about music as if it matters." Here is the World Cat record (http://www.worldcat.org/title/hideous-gnosis-black-metal-theory-symposium-1/oclc/607903118). The COI guideline that seems most to apply here is this: "Editing in an area in which you have professional or academic expertise is not, in itself, a conflict of interest. Using material you yourself have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is notable and conforms to the content policies. Excessive self-citation is strongly discouraged. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion." I believe this volume is notable, both because of the originality of its theoretical treatment of the subject, and because of the 'notable', in the sense of accomplished, persons who contribute to it.Nicolamasciandaro (talk) 12:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

3rd Wave of Black Metal

What about the recent resurgence of black metal in New England? http://www.facebook.com/pages/New-England-Black-Metal/151572928237035 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Totalmindeclipse (talk • contribs) 08:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a legitimate source for this? Facebook does not count. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 20:34, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Dimmu Borgir and others to "Second wave"

Dimmu Borgir should be added in listo of second wave bands. Second wave bands must have some of their realises from 1990. to 1994. (It says that in text above the list of second wave bands). Dimmu Borgir's Inn I Evighetens Morke and For All Tid are realised in 1994. If you want to say that is not Black metal for you then you are very wrong. Or I am wrong? That kind of Black metal was called "Melodic Black metal" until it is deleted and redicted to Black metal. Come on people! It is time to solve that quest. There are many so called "Melodic Black metal" bands which are now Black metal and they realised their records during "Second wave" period. There are two possibilities of solving this quest. First possibility is to make one unique genre for all those bands who used small amount of synths on "Raw Black metal". That style is very different from Symphonic Black metal. SBM uses lot more orchestra and have more cleaner sound. And so called Melodic Black metal is about melody on synths but sound is lot more "raw" and worse sound quality. My opinion about this quest is that we should merge "Ambiental Black metal" and "Melodic Black metal" as one special style in which there should be added all those bands. Black metal should have more styles beacuse it is too anodyned these days. Or Second posibility is to collect all those bands which were realising that kind of black metal and add it to the list of "second wave". Please answerw! It is time to solve this! - Vater-96 (talk) 14:19, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

It has already been "solved". We don't need to name-check Dimmu for the same reasons we don't need to name-check Fimbulwinter... we have enough examples. Regarding, "melodic black metal", find a whole bunch of sources discussing it as a legitimate subgenre and we'll talk; note that webzines aren't going to cut it. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 14:46, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Finding a bunch of sources and re-making of "Melodic Black metal" will not help someone who is trying to find some music or bands similar to these. There is one more term which is coined to describe that kind of music that is so called "Dark metal" that worked on Encyclopedia Metallum etc. I agree that these records are not Black metal as well as Symphonic Black metal. I think that main wikipedia's task is to help people with the usefull informations. In this case to find bands of similar style. Many things on wikipedia are solved with voting or discusion with out sources and that work. This is perfect place to do that. - Vater-96 (talk) 14:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Then you misunderstand Wikipedia. Nothing is ever resolved by voting here. Please read WP:V, WP:RS and WP:OR. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:13, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Allrigt then when there will not be such genre which describes that style i will add Dimmu to second wave, they have Inn I Evighetens Morke and For All Tid in period from 1990. till 1994. which is second wave period. That records are Black metal then. Vater-96 (talk) 22:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Cleaning up the discussion (at least)?

I`ve been following this article and arguing within it too, for a quite since. I still think it`s a mess, having some really stubbornly childish debate going on occasionally. I think some progress might be done on it by cleaning the insignificant and ideological details of it. Any change will of course arouse anger and I suggest starting by clearing some of this page, for it to be more accessible and inspiring, for example by erasing some dead topics, which seem to be dealt with or just faded without response...FINginga (talk) 15:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

What is insignificant or not may be discussed, and ideology is the most important aspect when it comes to this subculture. I wouldn’t like the old discussions to be erased, though, but archived when there was no new comment for several months. Do you know how to program an archive bot? --217/83 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Non-Norwegian “second wave” bands and the time between both generations

Other bands emerged after the “first wave” and at the same time as or even before the Norwegian bands, some of them were not even influenced by Mayhem (eycept Mayhem, there was almost no Norwegian Black Metal band around before 1991): Blasphemy (influences named here), Samael, VON, Rotting Christ (influences named on the band’s own Myspace page), Beherit (influences named here and there, actually including some second wave bands that were not from Norway), Impaled Nazarene (influences named here), Root, Ancient Rites etc. (those who know about Black Metal’s history should know that). I will therefore restore my version of that sentence. We should also include a little section on the time between both generations since there were bands that came between those but held the tradition. In my opinion, bands like Sarcófago are not a part of the first generation but of this meantime (and the 1987 issue of Metalion’s Slayer fanzine, a very important source for extreme Metal, shows the Black Metal wave was considered to have ended). --217/83 10:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

OK. If you have good reliable sources, do your edits. References will be checked by the other editors and if they are not reliable, your edits may be removed. Winter Gaze (talk) 11:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

There isn’t anything more reliable than the Slayer fanzine (its importance and good reputation is no secret to anyone knowing about Black Metal’s history) and its partial re-prints SLAYER. N° 1 à 5 and Metalion: The Slayer Mag Diaries (well, the French translations in SLAYER. N° 1 à 5 are awful, see de:Slayer (Fanzine)). For the bands I mentioned, see when they were formed, what they stated in the interviews or on their web sites, etc. And if bands started releasing their music before A Blaze in the Northern Sky, or even before 1991, it should be obvious they were not influenced by Norwegian bands, except maybe Mayhem’s demo, EP or the tracks on Projections of a Stained Mind. I will give you sources anyway:

• For the 1987 issue of Metalion’s Slayer fanzine and the Black Metal wave considered to have ended (at least as a trend, with a few Satanic bands left), see the Incubus interview: “Now that the latest fad of Black/Satanic bands seems to be over, there is still a few out there. I mean, bands like INCUBUS, MORBID ANGEL and SABBAT can’t just be said to jump on the so called band wagon!” (He means Sabbat from England, which was featured in the same issue, not the Japanese band, by the way.) This interview appeared in no. 5 and was re-printed in both books:
  • Incubus. In: Jon Kristiansen: SLAYER. N° 1 à 5. Rosières en Haye: Camion Blanc 2009. p. 381.
  • Incubus. In: Jon Kristiansen: Metalion: The Slayer Mag Diaries. Brooklyn, NY: Bazillion Points Books 2011. p. 88.
• By the way, Under the Sign of the Black Mark was considered a Death Metal LP back then (and even in the early 1990’s), which proves the “fad” was over: “This is probably one of the best Death Metal lp’es ever released! You got the in and out of Death Thrash […] and you got the doomy stuff […]!”
  • BATHORY - "Under The Sign Of The Black Mark" (UNDER ONE FLAG 11). In: Jon Kristiansen: SLAYER. N° 1 à 5. Rosières en Haye: Camion Blanc 2009. p. 439.
  • BATHORY - "Under The Sign Of The Black Mark" (UNDER ONE FLAG 11). In: Jon Kristiansen: Metalion: The Slayer Mag Diaries. Brooklyn, NY: Bazillion Points Books 2011. p. 101.
• To prove Blasphemy’s music was influenced by Hardcore, Heavy/Thrash/Death Metal and “first wave” bands (there were no Norwegian bands besides Mayhem and Stigma Diabolicum when Fallen Angel of Doom were released anyway), I linked to an interview posted on Full Moon Productions’ site, and could add: Blasphemy. In: Jon Kristiansen: Metalion: The Slayer Mag Diaries. Brooklyn, NY: Bazillion Points Books 2011. p. 200.
• Tormentor came before Blasphemy, so it should be obvious there could be no influences from the Norwegian movement, but to prove the music was influenced by “BATHORY, CELTIC FROST, MOTORHEAD, BULLDOZER and others”: Tormentor. In: Jon Kristiansen: Metalion: The Slayer Mag Diaries. Brooklyn, NY: Bazillion Points Books 2011. p. 240.
• I gave you one Impaled Nazarene interview to prove the music was influenced by the “first wave“, Thrash, Crossover (1980’s Crossover, meaning bands between Hardcore and Thrash), Crustcore and Grindcore, but to name another source for Venom as the main influence in the beginning: Impaled Nazarene. In: Jon Kristiansen: Metalion: The Slayer Mag Diaries. Brooklyn, NY: Bazillion Points Books 2011. p. 241.

You should know things like that, but anyway. If you have any questions left, ask. --217/83 13:20, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Very well. Good sources. Make necessary changes to the article (if you don't do these edits already) and don't forget to link to this talk page section in your edit summary to help other editors. Winter Gaze (talk) 13:56, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

I will, but it isn’t that easy to adapt the article to history between the first generation’s end and A Blaze in the Northern Sky and source it, since most books seem to focus on Norway and maybe Sweden. I began editing the article, but I would like others to help improving those sections. --217/83 15:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Repetition

Some info in the "vocals and lyrics" section is repeated in the "ideology" section. I think it would be best if we use the "vocals and lyrics" section to summarize blackmetal lyrics/ideology. We can use the "ideology" section to go into more detail. ~Asarlaí 06:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

You have seen my edit, so you know I seconded yours except the removal of the information that the term originally was used for bands with Satanic lyrics (and that I fixed that). --217/83 22:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)