Jump to content

Talk:Beartooth (band)

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

Genre

[edit]

The group's primary genre is mislabeled; "hardcore punk" is not the best-fitting title to describe the band's music. This is due to continual misattribution of the terms "hardcore", "punk", and ergo "hardcore punk". "Hardcore punk" is most often (and best) reserved for bands of the 1970's and 1980's who pioneered the genre. Due to Beartooth's recency, their affiliated acts, and the production style of their music, (polished, well-engineered audio is atypical of the hardcore punk genre), one of the many off-shoot subgenres (metalcore, nu-metal) that has grown out of hardcore-punk in the last 20 years would be the wisest and most relevant genre by which to classify the band.

Furthermore, the band's stylistic direction is heavily divergent from that of traditional hardcore punk. As is evidenced in the wikipedia article for a "breakdown", the slow-tempo to mid-tempo breaks that frequently occur in Beartooth songs are most strongly attributed with the metalcore genre rather than the fast-paced, fluidity of hardcore punk -- a genre which often avoids interludes altogether. Thusly I've edited the page to reflect the band's most accurate genre classification, metalcore.

While I agree with this unfortunately Hardcore Punk is the most referenced genre and metalcore appears to be secondary along with nu-metal being only an influence. Please cite some reliable sources before you add or change the genres in the article and its infobox otherwise it would be considered WP:OR. Aslo when you leave a comment please use the "Add new section" at the top left to start a new discussion and also use ~~~~ to leave your signature so as we know who we are discussing with, thank you. SilentDan297 talk 00:09, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't we add post-hardcore, since they are after the hardcore punk movement, but are primarily described as hardcore punk, post-hardcore implies anything after the movement that is influenced by hardcore. Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I Have a Problem - Article for Deletion

[edit]

Just in case you aren't aware, the article for the song I Have a Problem is currently nominated for deletion, please add to the discussion if you can here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/I_Have_a_Problem

SilentDan (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Beartooth (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request to change the genre

[edit]

I was going to edit this myself, but it said to bring it up on the talk page before I did that, so here I am. I am here to formally request permission to change the primary style of Beartooth from Hardcore-punk to Metalcore. The band's style of music is very different than the traditional Hardcore-punk sound, as they feature many features that are associated more with Metatalcore than Hardcore-punk, such as Metalcore-style breakdowns, melodic riffs, and frequent use of unclean vocals. Furthermore, Metalcore already draws inspiration from Hardcore-punk anyways, so by changing the gnere from Hardcore-punk to Metalcore, we'd still be including the Post-hardcore side of their style, while being able to properly name their genre at the same time. ThatOneJewishMetalhead (talk) 00:34, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The opening genre should be as general as possible, both hardcore punk and metalcore are cited and metalcore is a derivative of hardcore, therefore by saying they're a hardcore punk band you're including metalcore and any other derivatives of hardcore (such as post-hardcore). Issan Sumisu (talk) 12:04, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nu metalcore

[edit]

I added a source that calls them nu metal revival. may we add nu metalcore please? ~// This is a contribution by The Edit King 👑 \\~ 23:42, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely sourced, but even if a genre is sourced it doesn't necessarily have to be included if it is considered unlikely to be true. (While my opinion doesn't matter) I still don't understand the reference to Beartooth being a nu metal or a nu metalcore band, other than the occasional groovy riff (i.e. The Lines), but a groove doesn't make it nu metal, Pantera have grooves and I wouldn't call them nu metal. I think we should see if we can get a consensus, personally I'm against it. Issan Sumisu (talk) 07:38, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Beartooth album Disease

[edit]

tracklist

  1. Greatness or Death
  2. Disease
  3. Fire
  4. You Never Know
  5. Bad Listener
  6. After All
  7. Manipulation
  8. Enemy
  9. Believe
  10. Infection
  11. Used and Abused
  12. Clever

source: http://www.bringthenoise.com/blog/beartooth-detail-new-album-disease-following-new

Excissive number of genres

[edit]

It seems that the over-arching point of contention with this article is the several genres that the band falls into. This now seems fairly excessive with the following listed.

I am just wondering if for the sake of clarity we can perhaps reduce this to four main ones; similar to Metallica and Megadeth? Karst (talk) 12:34, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, hardcore punk and pop punk should be removed --FMSky (talk) 13:03, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Analysing the sources cited in the body:
Pop punk: Neither of the sources cited for pop punk actually call the band pop punk, [1] only calls the album Aggressive a "unique changeup of metalcore and pop-punk" (I assume changeup means fusion in this context?), then calls one song "More pop-punk than metal". Then [2] only says that the song "Agressive" has a "pop-punk engine", moments after saying it "rages like the best vintage screamo and old-school punk". I don't think anyone can argue that source is calling the band screamo or old-school punk, so pop punk shouldn't be inferred from that either. Also that source is from their record label, a primary source, which isn't reliable for categorisations such as this.
Hardcore:For hardcore, the only sources cited currently are [3] which calls the band melodic hardcore (a separately listed genre) and [4], which I don't think passes WP:RS? However there is very good sources calling them hardcore: [5] [6] (both NME), [7] [8].
Alt metal: The sources cited are[9] and [10], which are both by Lambgoat, and both call them a "hardcore and alternative metal group", then [11] is the only one that calls them fully alt metal.
Melodic hardcore: all seem to be cited well [12] [13] [14], however the latter may not pass WP:RS.
Hard rock: [15] calls them "hard rock driven metalcore", [16] calls them "Hard rock/metal/ mainstream/badass crossovers", which leads me to believe this the type of MetalSucks article not considered reliable, however [17] is a good source.
This shows there aren't any good sources for pop punk, so that's the obvious removal. Then there's only one each for alt metal and hard rock, so one of those two would be the natural other to remove. My vote would be for alt metal because hard rock is a more encompassing term and crosses over with alt metal significantly. Issan Sumisu (talk) 13:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didnt notice the duplicate sources for alt metal. Here are three additional ones though 1, 2, 3 --FMSky (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this you saying that you think alt metal should stay? In that case, do you think hard rock should be removed? Those two seem the most glaringly out of place besides pop punk. I know you proposed hardcore be deleted but that's one of the most abundant genres to find source for (second to metalcore), so it seems totally undue to remove it. Also, I think you should keep from editing the sources in that section while this discussion is ongoing because it removes the consistency, just post the sources you propose here. Issan Sumisu (talk) 14:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, imo they are primarily an alt metal band nowadays so that should stay. I think overall Metalcore, hardcore, alt metal and hard rock covers it best-- FMSky (talk) 14:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that could be a good conclusion. Hardcore does cover melodic hardcore. My only issue would be that I think hard rock only really applies to Below, there isn't much of that on the Surface, it's mostly just very poppy metalcore. It'd be useful to hear anybody else's takes on this. Issan Sumisu (talk) 14:08, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources for hard rock support the genre explicitly. And MetalSucks is a reliable source. See: WP:RSMUSIC: MetalSucks is "Generally reliable, but don't use overly satirical work." I'm suggesting keeping metalcore, melodic hardcore, hardcore punk, alternative metal, and hard rock. Five genres isn't overkill. Genres are included if they are sourced. Just because you don't think their material isn't hard rock, doesn't mean it can't be included. Genres are based on what sources say, not the opinions of Wikipedia editors. Bowling is life (talk) 15:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you're saying we need to go off of what sources say when that is what this discussion has been about. Nobody's saying to add anything that isn't sourced and nobody's saying to remove anything that is sourced. We're discussing the guideline described in Template:Infobox musical artist which says "preferably use two to four" sources and whether it should be cut down, nobody says it has be, that's why we're reaching a consensus. What I said was totally based on my analysis of the sources further up the page. Also, the comment about MetalSucks was in terms of that exact quote you posted. MetalSucks is often satire, when that source calls them hard rock, it also calls them "mainstream/badass crossovers", that's obviously tongue-in-cheek, it's being said in a joking manner. Issan Sumisu (talk) 16:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, I misread your message. I thought you were giving your opinion on what genres they are. I'm sorry for falsely accusing you of that. I was in a rush while writing my initial response. As for MetalSucks, I did not notice it was a satirical article. We can remove that source and I don't think is should be too hard to find another reliable source for hard rock. Bowling is life (talk) 17:17, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found another source for hard rock. It is MetalSucks again but it appears to be a legitimate article and not statical. [18] Bowling is life (talk) 17:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Beartooth_(band)&oldid=1228870228"