Talk:Alice in Chains

Talk archives:
*Archive One

Genre discussion

I have removed the genre hard rock from the genres beacause due to the fact that both Grunge and heavy metal are sub-genres of hard rock, it make the page a bit redudent. I have also changed the description from hard rock to rock. Rock is more general, therby preferable. Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 02:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Should alternative metal be added to genres? 'cause it is one of there main genres. --61x62x61 (talk) 22:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

No, grunge and heavy metal work fine, since those are the main genres that the group is refered to as. And personally, I never found alternative metal to be that useful of a genre discripter anyway. Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 22:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hard rock should be added. And actually, grunge should be removed. AIC was not grunge. They're from Seattle and they became big during the early 90s...that's where the comparisons to grunge start and end. --Endlessdan 16:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Even their official MySpace page states that they are grunge. I think that's reason enough to list it. [1] Erzsébet Báthory_{(talk|contr.)} 16:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I'm not going to remove it. I realize the general concensus is that AIC is grunge, but they really are not. But that is a debate for a different forum. --Endlessdan 16:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Grunge, heavy metal... done. works fine. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:46, 2 September 2008 (\\

I strongly advocate that "Glam rock" or "Glam metal" should be added as the genre of the early years of the band. Anyone familiar with the history of the band and their early cannot dispute that they started as you fairly typical 80s style glam rock/metal band —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.211.18.71 (talk) 17:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The main genre should not be rock. It should be grunge or heavy metal.Budtard (talk) 13:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Using the term "rock" in the article lead-in is never wrong. Grunge is rock, heavy metal is rock... they're all just forms of rock. And any good encyclopedia doesn't subjectively pigeonhole a subject right in the first line of an article. The Real Libs-speak politely 13:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

the genres in alice in chains realy seem to be clustering up so propose that we just move to heavy metal and grunge because the rest are just unnesisary. theirs no need for hard rock if we have heavy metal and no need for alternative metal if we have both heavy metal and grunge, grunge of course being a form of alternative rock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.162.47 (talk) 15:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

the genres in alice in chains realy seem to be clustering up so propose that we just move to heavy metal and grunge because the rest are just unnesisary. theirs no need for hard rock if we have heavy metal and no need for alternative metal if we have both heavy metal and grunge, grunge of course being a form of alternative rock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.162.47 (talk) 15:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, for all your grunge/metal whatever arguing, you forgot their record breaking album/ep and also sap. Acoustic rock needs to be added 93.186.28.202 (talk) 23:06, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

i edited it so their is just Grunge and heavy metal because we dont need so many different genresFeedmyeyes (talk) 15:41, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Genre - discussion reopened

Self titled album is entirely sludge metal,more reminiscent of bands like Crowbar & Acid Bath.Even Black Gives Away to Blue is quite sludgy,more metal,less grunge.So,sludge metal definitely needs to be added. Metalvayne (talk) 13:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a source calling them "sludge metal"? "This" sounds like "that" is just original research. Sergecross73 msg me 14:35, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

It seems they have been labelled as Sludge metal,but I know this source is pretty weak as far as wiki regulation goes. http://yuforum.net/metal-rock-punk-music/alice-chains-2160/ Metalvayne (talk) 11:26, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

That source is more than just weak, it's unacceptable. Messageboard/forum posts are not reliable sources, as they violate WP:SPS. You'd need a far better source to include this genre... Sergecross73 msg me 17:01, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

"Sludge metal" is not a music genre. I worked in radio for years, and it was a common tactic of the PR reps to push the newest buzzword descriptors to set their bands apart from the others. So what the year before was an "industrial" band became "alternative grindcore", "techno" becomes "darkwave synth", and so on. Just stick to broader, legitimate categorizations and leave the "sludge" kind of terms to the body of the article when describing the sound. Tarc (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree, I've looked into it a little because Metalvayne keeps on pushing that, among some other obscure genre/descriptions, onto band articles, and it is not a widely used term at all. I'm not sure I'd even use it in the body of the article honestly, as it's been weeks and he hasn't been able to find a single RS connecting "sludge metal" and Alice in Chains. (Unless you just meant that last statement as a general point about more obscure terms. Then I'd agree.) Sergecross73 msg me 13:03, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

someone keeps removing alternative rock, that genre needs to stay since sap & jar of flies are both alternative rock albums, and the genre is even listed in the band's allmusic page — Preceding unsigned comment added by I call the big one bitey (talk • contribs) 01:34, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Image...

Why is there a new image up there?

The band is nothing without Layne Stayley.. hell it's his band

Get an old image with him in it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Motoko11 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Adding A Management category to the template

Since the templates are protected, for music artists, is it possible to add another category for management companies similiar to the one for Labels? Ivygirl16 (talk) 17:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Also known as "Alice N' Chainz"

Should this really be here? I mean Alice in Chains isn't colloquially referred to as "Alice N' Chainz" in the manner that Led Zeppelin is known as "Led Zep". Alice N' Chainz was essentially a different band. I think this should be removed, but I thought I'd bring it up here first. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 09:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

No one opposes? Ok, I'll remove it. Please discuss here if you think it should be included. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 19:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

thank you for getting rid of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.156.17 (talk) 15:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

4th album

i heard there coming with something new this year (Seth4000 (talk) 17:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)) Seth4000

Sales

I can't help but find the 14M/3M division of their sales between the U.S. and the rest of the world a bit strange, since most commonly, multi-platinum acts like Alice In Chains have a fairly even split. Look at Nirvana, Pearl Jam and Soundgarden, to name their cousins.Revan ltrl (talk) 12:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

It does seem strange, yes. But were they really all that popular outside the U.S? Out of those bands you mentioned, I hear their songs everyday on the radio, but never have I heard Alice in Chains being played. So maybe it's possible that their fanbase was/is mostly American, in the same way Oasis was pretty huge in the U.K, but never really got a strong foothold in America. 121.222.179.94 (talk) 06:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Teen spirit is on everyday, and you'll here other nirvana pj and soundgarden songs on a few times a week, but in my life I've only ever seen would, check my brain and them bones ever be played on mtv 2, accumalating in about 10 plays altogether. Also, aic have only ever had 1 top 20 single in the uk, nirvana had 6 and pj and soundgarden had quite a lot. Given that after the us, the uk is the next biggest music market in the world, I expect that its very close to being right 93.186.28.202 (talk) 23:12, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

And still it suddenly turned out that they had indeed sold more outside the US... Revan (talk) 21:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Albums charting

should it be mentioned along side the fact that they had 2 number 1 albums that they also had several others in the top 10 (dirt, black gives way to blue, unplugged and other) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.151.53 (talk) 21:34, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Inactivity

I changed up the part in the third paragraph about the band's inactivity because it made it seem like that was all Layne's fault, which isn't true according to the other members. Jerry, Mike and Sean all seemed pretty candid about their own substance abuse in the book Grunge is Dead and that the reason for their inactivity was so they could all get healthy, not just Layne. Basically, Jerry said that Layne was the one who paid the ultimate price for what they were all messing around with and that it really wasn't all his fault they had two Number One albums and couldn't do much about them. Shaneymike (talk) 16:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Sweet Alice

I've started an article for Sweet Alice. Hope it meets Wiki standards. I do realize it may not be notable enough for an article but I figured it was worth a shot. Shaneymike (talk) 20:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

"Killing Yourself" music video

On the list of music videos, in the discography, the first one is Killing Yourself. But there's no mention to it anywhere else. I can't even find that video on the Alice in Chains official website or youtube. Neither in other web pages. Does that video even exist? I'd appreciate some links that show it or some references. By the way, that video isn't neither on Music Bank: The Videos —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.5.144.81 (talk) 02:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Alice N' Chains

Should we really have an Alice N' Chains article? I already mentioned this on that article's talk page, so to quote myself, "Usually the hair band days of Layne Staley are considered just the beginning of Alice in Chains, not a band of it's own. Take Rolling Stone for example: "Starting out as a fledgling glam-metal outfit," this suggests that this was just an early incarnation of the group." RG (talk) 23:07, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I would argue that the two are separate entities, albeit with similar (okay, practically the same) name(s). The band's membership, sound and setlist were quite different. Nonetheless, I think that Rolling Stone quote you mention actually refers to the early days of Alice in Chains proper (i.e., the latter band formed by Staley, Cantrell, Starr and Kinney, not the former with Staley and three other musicians,) who were themselves essentially born from the glam metal scene. I think that calling Alice N' Chainz/Chains (I've seen it spelled both ways) the beginning of Alice in Chains is misleading - in fact, the latter was a new band who later adopted a moniker similar to an old, disconnected project from one of the members. Colinclarksmith (talk) 02:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

The only real piece of evidence that I'll found that these were two separate acts was noisecreep, which really much (basically all the sources in the Alice 'N Chains article are youtube videos and blogs.) I think we'll need more editors input on this topic. RG (talk) 02:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, if you're on the hunt for evidence, I recommend the liner notes to the Music Bank boxed set, which seem to me to indicate that Alice in Chains in fact grew directly out of Cantrell, Starr and Kinney's group Diamond Lie upon Staley's joining and next adopted their moniker. I think that the years in the Wiki Alice in Chains article are a little clouded - references to 1986 might be what are confusing you, since Alice in Chains proper really began in 1987. Of course we should certainly see what other editors think about the subject. Colinclarksmith (talk) 02:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Here are a few other bits of 'evidence' that seem to me to support my read. I can't find an online version of the Music Bank liner notes, unfortunately. 1.) Diamond Lie press kit that cites Alice 'N Chains as a former band of Staley's and indicates Cantrell, Starr and Kinney as the band's other members, 2.) an article that mentions this press kit with some fan commentary, 3.) Some photos from pre-Alice in Chains days, including a chronology that supports my read. Again, I think these sources make clear that claims that Alice in Chains began as a glam metal band do not necessarily mean that this glam metal band was Alice 'N Chains - in fact, all of the musicians came directly out of the glam metal scene. Colinclarksmith (talk) 02:34, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Alice N' Chainz (Staley) and Diamond Lie (Cantell, Starr, & Kinney) were two bands at the music band who were sharing the same vocalist. Eventually they just merged and kept the Alice N' Chainz moniker for just a short bit before changing it. Burningclean _[speak] 02:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC

*Music Bank, not band. Burningclean _[speak] 02:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

If the majority of the folks weighing in on this decide to merge the Alice N' Chains article, I will respect their decision. I will have you know that we have articles for Malice and Easy Cure, which featured future members of The Cure. Of course that doesn't necessarily justify the existence of the Alice N' Chains article. I'm just throwing that out there in case you all aren't aware. Shaneymike (talk) 18:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I know that I, for one, am less concerned with preserving the Alice N' Chains article than I am with guarding against the error of claiming that Alice in Chains is a continuation of Alice N' Chains. This would imply that the current Alice in Chains has no original members, etc. Colinclarksmith (talk) 20:25, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

The Alice N' Chains article originally focused strictly on the demos, hence it was called Alice in Chains demos. I changed to Alice N' Chains and added to it so that it also discusses the people that were involved. Shaneymike (talk) 14:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Lesson Learned page

can somebody make a wiki page for Lessons Learned?174.61.35.159 (talk) 22:06, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

DuVall is not a replacement for Staley

I would like to suggest one thing to whoever has been putting the articles together. As a fan of Alice in Chains as long as I can remember make sure you pay the proper respect to Layne Staley. Willam DuVall is NOT a replacement for Layne Staley if you did your research correctly, it was said they would never name anyone a fulltime replacement for Layne Staley, he's not even credited in the new album as lead singer, just vocalist. There will never be anyone who can replace Layne, even the band says so, so make sure you get it right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.148.146.80 (talk) 05:47, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

1980s music groups

Alice in Chains never released anything in the '80s even though they formed in 1987. So stop putting them under the "1980s music groups" category. 38.118.23.20 (talk) 08:46, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

That is no reason for its removal. Please read Category:1980s music groups: "Musical groups active during the 1980s." - Nothing that states that this only applies to those that released an album. They formed in 1987, they played live shows and recorded demos (they began recording their debut album in 1989 as well I think) so they were active during the 80s. HrZ (talk) 10:49, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Main genre?

should it be alternative metal or heavy metal? because jerry's guitar playing is largely inspired by black sabbath's style of guitar playing, who are the blueprint for heavy metal music. [same goes for soundgarden who's playing sounds uncannily similar to sabbath] also it's been noted in many interviews that alice in chains main inspiration was black sabbath. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.220.148 (talk) 13:45, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for the addition of 'heavy metal' in the lead with 'rock' kept intact

As Alice in Chains are more often denoted as an important band in the history of metal music rather than 'alternative' or 'grunge',I'd like to propose for adding 'heavy metal' or simply 'metal' in the lead in the vein of their allmusic bio where they've been introduced as 'a definitive heavy metal band of early 90's'.I'd like to keep 'rock' intact as well.Thoughts? Bloomgloom talk 12:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey guys,please participate in discussion.It's frustrating to see not a single reply in 24 hours.Bloomgloom talk 14:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe I had heavy metal listed in the lead when I originally wrote the article, so I'm fine with it. Burningclean _[speak] 18:02, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the silence. I usually skip genre discussions. I'm fine with adding heavy metal or metal to the lead. CCS81 (talk) 21:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

In the lead you can already read: "Although widely associated with grunge music, the band's sound incorporates heavy metal and acoustic elements". If you begin to emphasize their metal part, then what about their acustic side, e.g. Sap or Jar of Flies? My opinion is that in the lead has already been reached a really balanced presentation. Mauro Lanari --134.255.169.95 (talk) 22:32, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Mauro Lanari,That's why I've stated that I want to keep 'rock' intact as well to represent their acoustic & progressive nature.:) Any more suggestions guys? Bloomgloom talk 06:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe they should be mentioned as an Alternative metal band in the lead, like Deftones and Chevelle are, since Alternative metal is the main genre they've played over their career, and it covers both heavy metal and alternative rock. — Preceding unsigned comment added by I call the big one bitey (talk • contribs) 07:03, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

No,they neither are Alt-metal nor they sound like Deftones or Chevelle,they've been associated with the label just because they incorporated some acoustic & delicate side to their music & got lumped into the 'grunge/alternative' pigeonhole just because they were from Seattle,WA.Their sound is massively similar to early Black Sabbath and Proto-doom metal bands just like Soundgarden.And lastly,their allmusic bio designates them as "the definitive heavy metal band of early 90's" as I've mentioned earlier.And I call the big one bitey, please arrange your comments with indentation in future, Thanks. Bloomgloom talk 07:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

To me, what is true is that "Alice in Chains rose to international fame as part of the grunge movement of the early 1990s" but "although widely associated with grunge music, the band's sound incorporates heavy metal and acoustic elements." (Two clauses in the current lead in separate paragraphs, but that could be placed together in a rewrite). They became famous as part of the grunge scene, and had a grunge sound, but were decidedly more a metal group. Since they did have an acoustic nature, I lean towards describing them as 'metal' rather than 'heavy-metal'. So I would be in favor of an amendment to the lead. Fylbecatulous talk 09:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes,I agree.Simply metal would be perfect as well as keeping 'rock' intact e.g.Alice in Chains is an American metal/rock band formed in Seattle. Bloomgloom talk 10:36, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

i think we should wait until the new album comes out, and if people are calling it heavy metal or any other form of metal (doom metal, sludge metal etc.) then we should start changing the genres and lead paragraph, but until then it's pretty stable as it is imo.

Hmm,I don't think so.Because,if we dig the history of the band we get to know that they were promoted as a heavy metal band during Facelift,then during the days of EPs,Dirt & Alice in Chains, Columbia used to market them to both metal & grunge fans.And as far as the forthcoming album is concerned,if it gets labelled as doom metal in the vein of the self-titled album & Black Gives Way to Blue which are considered as borderline doom metal albums amongst many listeners, we would think about modifying according to the requirements then.And I call the big one bitey how many times I've to tell you to indent & sign your comments please. Bloomgloom talk 11:10, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Further,I'd like to add that no changes required to the paragraph although widely associated with grunge music, the band's sound incorporates heavy metal and acoustic elements. The only thing that needs to be changed is the introductory sentence as I've mentined above stylized as Alice in Chains is an American metal/rock band formed in Seattle. Bloomgloom talk 11:19, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Instead, "that's why I've stated that I want to keep 'rock' intact as well to represent their [metal], acoustic & progressive nature". Mauro Lanari --134.255.169.95 (talk) 11:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I didn't understand the above comment made by mr.Mauro Lanari,my bad.Can someone clarify it to me please? Bloomgloom talk 11:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Two days ago I added this source. How do you think to sum up such a variety of styles and genres without using just the one and only best word? Rock: that's it, nothing more. IMHO, of course. M.L. --134.255.169.95 (talk) 12:42, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

The allmusic reference was there for a long time.It doesn't help the case if you intentionally add a cached copy of it & it feels awkward to be redirected to a cached version of a website.Fixed it anyway. Bloomgloom talk 13:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Moreover,all the listed umbrella genres are included in the infobox.Mauro Lanari,I don't think you've understood the topic clearly.I've said in the beginning that Allmusic has introduced them as the definitive heavy metal band of the early 90's.Therefore,likewise it's important to add metal/heavy metal in the lead.So as it stands till now it's 4 to 2 in favor of adding heavy metal/metal in the lead.Any further comments? Bloomgloom talk 14:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

The Google webchace is a heuristic method, so the users can find first and better what is relevant in the reference. Someone appreciates it, someone else no, as you. By the way: you have a very, very but very personal interest for wanting this change, or not? For you, that AllMusic's statement is just an excuse, a gimmick. M.L. --134.255.169.95 (talk) 14:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Not really, if awful bands like Slipknot, Avenged Sevenfold, Disturbed can have heavy metal in the lead,then why can't a real metal band like Alice in Chains be described as metal in the lead? Simple.You can now think of me whatever you like. Bloomgloom talk 14:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

"Helter Skelter" has «a sound as loud and dirty as possible, the clangorous piece has been noted for both its "proto-metal roar" and "unique textures" and is considered by music historians as a key influence in the development of heavy metal.» Do you think to add "metal" also to the/The Beatles? M.L. --134.255.169.95 (talk) 14:54, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

That piece of logic is simply irrelevant here.And another funny thing is I just came across your userpage,you seem to be quite logical,smart & you're obsessed with Cosmology & Anthropology.But I don't understand one simple thing is that why you're exposing your IP address to everyone,LOL. Bloomgloom talk 15:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Anyone who would like to add further thoughts are welcome. Bloomgloom talk 11:54, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I am fine with adding 'heavy metal' to the lead's opening sentence. My only suggestion would be to avoid hyphens, for the sake of readability. I suggest something like, Alice in Chains are a heavy metal-influenced rock band, or ...rock and heavy metal band, or some such. CCS81 (talk) 15:47, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Alice in Chains are a heavy metal-influenced rock band seems to me quite well, even if right now I'm listening to the trip hop mix of "Again". Yes, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath and so on (by the way: why [heavy] metal instead of hard rock? Really, I don't know), but, with also their unplugged, the AiC are/were a band with a personality too strong, too rich and too large to be confined within a single label. AllMusic itself was forced to use a whole list of styles and genres to define them. However, any changes must be repeated in every article of their discography, where is always written "a work by the American rock band". My IP address for your LOLs: 134.255.169.95 (talk) 19:56, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Heavy metal-influenced rock band sounds extremely awkward for a wikipedia article.There are several bands in wikipedia described as heavy metal/hard rock in the lead and that's not hyphen /<-- this is called an oblique.As far as the labelling is concerned Jerry Cantrell himself told to Guitar international in an interview in 1995 that he thinks Alice in Chains is principally a heavy metal band, & they also infuse a bit of blues & punk to create the trademark sound.That's it if the founder of the band describes the band as chiefly heavy metal,I don't understand who else has a problem.And Mauro,thank you for teh lulz and another thing you listening to the trip-hop mix of 'Again'? Seriously? :D Bloomgloom talk 6:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the news, Bloomgloom, I'm 47 and therefore old enough to know these things by myself. The guitarist labelled his group in that way: by his POV it's absolutely right. But is that all-the-enciclopedic-truth about the AiC? PS: my ex bandmate has recorded two albums with Albini (post/math-rock: shit, according to me), while I remixed some nu metal songs (Korn, Deftones, ecc.) and here I'm editing the post-grunge article. Now I'm listening to the "gospel" (?) vocals by Ann Wilson in "Am I Inside" and "Right Turn". As musician and artistic producer, I hate to be labelled, I only distinguish between good and bad music. I know that someone has to do it, but at least do it right. --134.255.169.95 (talk) 11:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

once again, alternative metal also covers the progressive and experimental nature of alice in chains in the same way it does for faith no more, jane's addiction, tool, helmet and others, more reason for it to be used in the lead paragraph over rock

I call the big one bitey, what the hell is your problem man?Every single time you add comments without indenting and signing.Anyway, no, alternative metal is not appropriate for the lead because AiC has a rock & roll or post-glam metal-ish nature to their earlier music as well.That's why allmusic referred to them as post-Van Halen metal as well.Simply the term metal/rock in the lead is the best way to describe them. Bloomgloom talk 12:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes but alternative metal covers both heavy metal and hard rock (or post-van halen metal as allmusic calls it) and alternative/grunge, meaning other than rock, it covers the most ground I.C.T.B.O.B. —Preceding undated comment added 13:16, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Just one question: why do AllMusic put two Coldplay's songs among the post-grunge? Really sure that Rovi is a reliable source? I think it has its own POV as well Cantrell. So, instead of adding your info in the lead, why not simply insert them in the article? 134.255.169.95 (talk) 13:21, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

btw if anyone wants to add doom metal to the infobox they can since i found this source calling BGWTB doom metal http://www.cornellsun.com/section/arts/content/2009/10/08/test-spin-alice-chains I call the big one bitey —Preceding undated comment added 14:22, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it's fine to add doom metal in Black Gives Way to Blue but let's wait for the next album.If it gets doom metal tag by the media then it's fair enough to add doom metal to the infobox of the main article.And Mauro, as I've said in response to your illustration regarding The Beatles song the same case applies for that Coldplay example.Just bad logic. Bloomgloom talk 16:09, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Another thing is that Black Label Society has heavy metal in the lead.BLS's sound is very similar to Alice in Chains they have a delicate, acoustic side like AiC too in albums like Hangover Music Vol. VI or the more recent album The Song Remains Not the Same & Zakk has written couple of acoustic songs for every other album as well.So, similarly I think there's no problem in adding heavy metal to the lead of Alice in Chains. Bloomgloom talk 16:37, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Alternative solution

Guys, I suggest that the lead section should be like Melvins.Since AiC's style is so diverse,I think it's better to avoid putting any paticular style in the lead.Thoughts? Bloomgloom talk 07:16, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

According to my standards, you ask questions too deep: what is rock? I once wrote a book on the subject, then a blog, then some reviews of semiology of music. And my ideas on it continue to change. --134.255.169.95 (talk) 08:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Do you consider this a reliable source? --134.255.169.95 (talk) 10:26, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, affirmative to alternate solution (not the google book) . ツ The lead we have would almost work with simply subtracting 'rock' from the first sentence. The second and third paragraphs segue nicely into why "neat categorization (is) difficult", as the Melvins article says. The caveat is that Melvins have a veritible vegetable garden of genres in their infobox: (stoner rock???). Therefore, it would be more difficult to keep a gate on ours. I already like the identification of AiC as post-glam metal or glam metal, as you mentioned above and doom metal has been offered up, not incorrectly. Fylbecatulous talk 13:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Pediabook, not Google book: published the work on this topic of the editors here. --134.255.169.95 (talk) 14:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Fylbecatulous, Nicely said mate.And Mauro sorry to say but didn't get your notion this time, please elaborate further. Bloomgloom talk 14:27, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Mauro,that google book or pediabook whatever it is seems to be an imitation of an older version of AiC's wikipedia article to me. Bloomgloom talk 14:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

It is not a simple imitation of an older version of AiC's wikipedia article, but its accurate transcription with at the end the list of all the wikipedian editors. The publisher is Pediapress: any of you know something about that? ---134.255.169.95 (talk) 16:38, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Sludge is not a genre

We've been over this stuff many, many times on this talk page...look above to the edit-warring initiated by Metalvayne (talk · contribs), now topic-banned from this article. Not every buzzword-of-the-moment gets to be listed in the infobox; keep it simple and concise with actual musical genres (alt, metal, pop, blues, etc...) Otherwise we'd be awash in PR Team catchy terms like synthcore, electro-pop, darkwave, and so on all across every musical artist article in the project. Tarc (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

it has a page on wikipedia, therefore it's a real genre and can be used in band's infoboxes, and if you're going to remove sludge metal for "not being an actual genre" than you might as well remove grunge which itself is/was a buzzword of the moment and not an actual music genre I call the big one bitey (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:13, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Tarc, according to your weird speculation about sludge metal it appears that Power metal, Thrash metal, Black metal, Stoner metal, Gothic metal, Viking metal these all are not subgenres but in reality those all have been dubbed by various professional critics in the past and as a result there are wikipedia articles about all of them, same theory applies for sludge metal.And yes, as I call the big one bitey said if you are insisted not to keep sludge then remove grunge as well.It seems I've posted a message on your talk page which has been recently removed by you.No problem I'm stating the same thing here for convenience.As you're insisted to remove all things related to sludge metal then remove it from Down's article, remove from Melvins, remove from Eyehategod, remove from Black Label Society & all other articles of metal/rock bands which are related.And finally you can help by removing the entire sludge metal article from Wikipedia.Good luck.And I don't care who has been topic-banned, all I care is that there are multiple sources calling Alice in Chains sludge metal and sludge rock which meet the verifiability & I'll keep pushing for it's inclusion because that's how Wikipedia works. Bloomgloom talk 16:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I would delete "viking metal" (WTF?) and any of those other retarded terms from any article that I came across, but its not my job to police the entire project, I have a select few band articles on the watch list, including this one. There's nothing really new being discussed here that wasn't covered up at Talk:Alice in Chains#Genre discussion. Tarc (talk) 16:53, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay, all of this sucks. It's causing an unstable article, which is not good for a featured article. Why don't we just leave it all alone. all these genres are covered in the Style section of the article. If people care enough they'll read that anyway. Burningclean _[speak] 16:58, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Beatles RfC

You are invited to participate in an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles on the issue of capitalizing the definite article when mentioning the band's name in running prose. This long-standing dispute is the subject of an open mediation case and we are requesting your help with determining the current community consensus. For the mediators. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:10, 24 September 2012 (UTC)