Talk:Cradle of Filth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Cradle of Filth was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
March 6, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed



Opening statements[edit]


The policy of this page is to adhere to Wikipedia's NPOV rules regarding Cradle of Filth's genre: "The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these should be presented fairly, but not asserted. All significant points of view are presented, not just the most popular one. It should not be asserted that the most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one. Readers are left to form their own opinions." With this in mind, we report the fact that nobody can agree on a genre, and we use the terms "extreme metal", "heavy metal" and "metal" in their non-specific, "umbrella" sense to describe what sort of band they are. All discussions on this subject, going back at least 18 months, are archived here. Before adding anything further here, or changing the genre on the main page, please read the archive and the whole of the main page including the genre section (ie. not just the infobox and the first line of the first paragraph). If you genuinely believe you have something new to add, post it, and preface your contribution with the words "jam donut" to prove that you've read (and understood) this far. If you do not preface your message with "jam donut", it will be deleted. Cardinal Wurzel 16:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Archive notes[edit]

I have archived the discussions for this page, as it was getting a bit large. There are three main archives so far, one for Genre Disputes (by far the largest), one for discussions for the article, and a final one for every other subject. All new posts must be made here, and when this page gets over-sized again, we shall move each discussion into the relevant archive. I have put up the Archive Template for you all, enjoy. - The Haunted Angel (The Forest Whispers My Name)


I've taken this to the talk page at WP:ENGVAR to see if we can get a consensus. It's about 50/50 so far. Cardinal Wurzel 11:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

And the answer is: "is" is technically gramatically correct, but "are" is generally accepted because, while "band" is a singular noun, its inference is plural. See synesis. Y'know, I learned something today... Cardinal Wurzel 19:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Uh, it's "are" because CoF is from the UK. Therefore, you use British-English. Just take a look at other Britsh bands such as Judas Priest, Venom and Iron Maiden. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 01:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
See American and British English differences#Formal and notional agreement for discussion of this grammatical difference. --Stormie (talk) 02:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


shouldn't the category Category:Roadrunner Records artists be added to the page, since they're signed to roadrunner. Balthazar (talk) 03:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah - go ahead and add it if you wish. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 16:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

i was not sure what category you wanted this posted under, but the 2008 and Onward section needs updated. The Thornography tour started in 2007 and the band toured with Gwar later that year on the Viva La Bands tour. There is a sample of the new album that we have made availible on the Roadrunner website and I can check for link accessibility if approved to edit. Kfutch (talk) 22:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Brutal Death Metal[edit]

Saying they've been described as brutal death metal is ridiculous. It is fairly apparent that whoever authored the page cited had no clue what brutal death metal is, or even death metal. I suggest they listen to some actual brutal death metal bands, I suggest Sikfuk. The page was not one of journalistic integrity, but instead appeared to be written by some random guy (as evidenced by the pooooor site design)... Perhaps the person who gave the cite? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

You miss the point... Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 22:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, well, to be fair, the point that "a whole bunch of critics have labelled them with a whole bunch of labels" would be made a little more strongly if all the references were to reviewers of slightly more notable stature than that brutal death metal one. --Stormie (talk) 23:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
JAM DONUT Go listen to "Human Waste" or "Effigy of the Forgotten" by Suffocation, "Cranial Impalement" by Disgorge (US) or even "Tomb of the Mutilated" by Cannibal Corpse, then tell me Cradle of Filth sounds anything like brutal death metal. If the opinion of anybody with a hosted website is considered a valid reference for a Wikipedia article, then I might have to consider getting my own website. I could misinform people like this article does! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Again, you miss the point. We're not saying they sound like brutal death metal, we're saying that their genre has been debated upon, and this is one of the many labels they have been branded. ≈ The Haunted Angel 01:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

While I laugh my ass off at the fucking retard that called Cradle of Filth "brutal death metal," we need to make one thing clear. Cradle of filth is not black metal. At all. End of story. kvltTNBMer —Preceding undated comment was added at 02:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

okay, im just letting people know that i changed the genre names from 'extreme metal' to 'melodic black metal' on the first 3 albums, the last demo, and first EP of the c.o.f. discography. this is because its the truth. fair enough that there is a large genre dispute, and the band do incorporate much different genres into one these days in the past few albums, although what noone seems to understand is that for the beginning of cradle of filth they were officially and with no question, a melodic black metal band. if you guys need proof, listen to the first albums and read about melodic black metal. all of the characteristics are there. ≈ [[User: Okram 09|18 February 2008 (UTC)

You don't understand how Wikipedia works. Content is dictated by verifiability not truth. In this case, you say to 'go away and listen to the albums'; in Wikipedia-speak this constitutes original research. What you need is a reliable, third-party source. I wish more people on Wikipedia in general could get their heads round this point as most genre-debates revolve around people loudly asserting their POV but never bothering to find reliable sources. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 11:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Blackmetalbaz pretty much summed it up there; but I'll just add this - please do not change the genre in any of their stuff at all. You may be sure you know what the genre is, but your view is not set in stone. It is not our duty to declare what we think their genre is, it is instead our duty to show that it is disputed, and to show the links that would say it is a variety of different genres. Although you were only trying to do the right thing, please note that this is a very touchy subject, and there have been vandals who would change their genre even after we have told them why it should remain ambiguous, and they ended up getting banned; please do not become one of them. ≈ The Haunted Angel 19:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Well... I've got a better idea... why we don't just put “melodic black metal”, “gothic metal” and “symphonic metal” in the genre thing? let me explain: I've been reading lots of articles about metal bands and non-metal bands, and most of them have more than two genres.
-------For example; Rolling Stones have “blues”, “rock”, “reggae”, “country”, etc... however, that doesn't mean that they play one song of each, but a mixture (I mean... taking this from one and that from other to form a cool combination...)
-------Same happens, for example with Children of Bodom... Take for example, “power metal” keyboards, “melodic death metal” riffs and vocals, “thrash metal” drumming, and for instance “neo-classical metal” guitar solos... Then we should not call Children of Bodom a “Neo-classical melodic death thrash power metal” band ((... I also think that long genre names sound stupid and too specific)) but a (perhaps) “metal” band with some characteristics of “melodic death metal”, “power metal”, “neoclassical metal” and etc... (and put in the genre space the three styles mentioned, wouldn't it?)
-------So... with Cradle of Filth, we should put as an opening sentence “Cradle of Filth is an extreme metal band formed by blah blah...” and in the genre space, simply put “melodic black metal”, “symphonic metal” and maybe “gothic metal” too. Then maybe put a debated genre section and explain the labelling problems.
-------After all, we should not complicate our lives with these labelling issue. I mean - if some reader wanting to know about Cradle of Filth (that never listened to it) wanted to know how people call their music style, probably after reading this genre thing that I already explained would know that the band takes a bit of one style and a bit of another one. Then, if he/she wants more details, could then search for more info in the debated genre section What do you think about it? I think it's the best way to solve it, not only with Cradle of Filth, but regarding many other bands that mash up elements from different styles. After all, I think that music is too varied and specially metal (too much sub-genres): it would be difficult to explain the music style in just 3 words... Wouldn't it?coco (talk) 03:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you miss the point; this has been discussed so many times in the past that now no matter what we call them aside from "extreme metal", it is POV. It is not our job to label Cradle one thing or another, but to show that they have been called these things over a period of time; it's POV to say that they are one thing or another, and if we add one genre that they've been called, we'd have to add them all. ≈ The Haunted Angel 19:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

yeah, like THA said its not our job to give them a specific genre label but only to mention that they have no set genre as of this time. as wiki is unopinionated, we should just set the genre as disputed until the band or record company releases a statement containing a set genre. Chipthief00 (talk) 21:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Order of the Dragon[edit]

What does the medieval order have to do with Cradle of Filth, nowhere in this article does it mention, is it a fanclub or something, it just shows a picture which claims to be based off of the medieval one (which its clearly not, the Order's symbol uses an Ouroborous dragon with no circle around it, no moon, its not even culturally the same kind of dragon from what I see from the Austrian Museum sketch). I'm deleting until you give a reason for the picture, and drop the "a slight adaptation of the medieval original." unless they actually have a source (OMYGOD yes, sources you lazy potatoes) from Cradle or their representitives saying its a modification of the original. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thats alot better, although your source seems to be a vampire fansite, thats not a respectable source, thans not even an eastern European dragon, it looks alot more like a modern firebreathing British dragon, Slav dragons tend to be more like winged snakes or hydras and less lizard like. The picture here , here , here and here (look carefully at the yellow circle in the red) are infact based off of the real Order of the Dragon symbol, as kept by the Austrian Museum I believe. Furthermore, your source should be from Cradle saying they based the modern symbol off of the Order of the Dragons, otherwise it is original research to say that. Your also still missing the point of this, this isn't a place to talk about how much you like Cradle or how much you know about them, your supposed to provide information to people who know nothing about Cradle of Filth, like me, actually write a sentence in the article that the Order of the Dragon is the name of their fanclub, when they did that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC) Yes, lazy potatoes, I figure what I really wanted to say would be offensive. Good article otherwise, a hell of alot better than the Order of the Dragon article, apparently Zulu theology has some relevence to Eastern European medieval Orders. I think I'll download Damnation and a Day later, before purchase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

You are an illegal downloader of music and I shall tell a policeman. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 19:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Roffle... ≈ The Haunted Angel 20:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Call your American police all you want, besides I usually buy what I download, if its worthwhile, too many videogames are $80 and not worth $20. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Save it for the judge, buddyboy. Your ass is going down for six to ten this time, for sure! Lieutenant Wurzel (talk) 11:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Good luck tracking him down. User:Zaru —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

What for, I'm not breaking any laws where I love, maybe you didn't get me calling you America, but I'm not. I buy stuff for because they deserve it, not for the law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:14, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Blimey, you can't make a joke round here, can you? Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Not one that involves me in jail, no. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Damnation Chart Position[edit]

Anyone know where Damnation and a Day stood on the top 200? It's not listed on the album page..

According to Rockdetector it got to number 44 in the UK and number 140 in the US. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 21:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The Picture[edit]

The picture at the top of the page is fake. It's like action figures or something. Someone should replace it. CheesePiggy (talk) 06:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Definitely looks real to me. = ∫tc 5th Eye 07:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't think it's fake but sure it's not very good.I agree Dani and Paul look like action figures but that's not what bothers me.It's just...they look really ugly on that picture.. :\ Xr 1 (talk) 21:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

yeah, i will try to look for a picture that... better suits the page. Chipthief00 (talk) 03:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Paul's face looks deformed...CheesePiggy (talk) 04:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

haha, thay both do. i can see how they kinda look like action figures too. if i find a good picture ill post a link here and let you guys check it out first. Chipthief00 (talk) 05:21, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I think this looks pretty good, check it out and add it to the page if you agree. heres the link Chipthief00 (talk) 02:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

You can't use promotional / professionally-taken photos, such as that one, under free use, since free photos are available (i.e. live pictures). = ∫tc 5th Eye 03:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

ok, thanks for mentioning that. ill keep that in mind from now on and ill keep looking. Chipthief00 (talk) 12:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

What about the picture that I've found? It shows all members during a live show, seems pretty recent: Zaruyache (talk) 22:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how to change the anyone else want to update this using the above listed picture? It seems good to me72.72.222.152 (talk) 02:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

But the picture has to belong to you. Or failing that, the person who took it has to waive all rights to it and allow its free distribution. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 23:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

not as bad a picture, but it is outdated (drummer change since) and you do have to reference the source if it is going to be used. Updated pics (and their references) can be found on the COF website. Kfutch (talk) 22:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Associated acts[edit]

Is it alright if i add some other bands associated to cradle? Chipthief00 (talk) 21:47, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course, as long as they have shared members. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 22:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Along those lines, I have a few to add, also ≈ The Haunted Angel 17:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
right, shared members as in have been listed in both bands. my bad. Chipthief00 (talk) 18:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
No problem. ≈ The Haunted Angel 18:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Symphonic Extreme Metal smells like a jam donut.[edit]

Why not? Discuss................... Zaruyache (talk) 22:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

just look at the archived page on genre, if you wanna ask then add it to the genre section.
If you find a reliable source for CoF being labelled "symphonic extreme metal", add it to the list at Cradle of Filth#Genre. But this article is not going to make a statement that "Cradle of Filth is a symphonic extreme metal band". Their genre is disputed, and we are not going to take a side in that dispute. We are simply going to document the dispute. --Stormie (talk) 02:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I love you guys, this genre-war to me was a constant fighting against the urge to vandalize the page and to it with some-thing like: 'Cradle of Filth is a cult and obscure suicidal black ambient project from the Czech Republic who release in limited editions of 200 and use an assaultive and hardly-penetrable noisy production style, average track length of 25 minutes and high levels of repetition. The sole member has always been Dani Filth who at all times refused to take any compromises, he has not let any other person take any creative work out of his hands and does all instrumentalisation, cover art, production and writing on his own, he has refused to make any band pictures as he feels they are a cheap medium to sell music and he has refused to make a Myspace page or give any description of his music feeling that it's not relevant and if people can't hear into his music what he intended than he has done none other than have failed. He releases all music into the public domain.'Rajakhr (talk) 00:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


I was just wondering if "Bitter Suites to Succubi" should be relisted as an EP? It seems to confuse people that there are 9 albums listed as studio albums, yet only 8 (including Godspeed) are actually studio albums magnius (talk) 13:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

new sections[edit]

please someone re-section this article doing the sections like

Early days(1991-1994) The Principles Of Evil Made Flesh(1994-1996) etc.

so it will look better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathmagnetic08 (talkcontribs) 17:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Better knock down the Gothic Metal[edit]

Hey kids, better rid of the information on Cradle of Filth on the gothic metal page about them being "gothic black metal". I realized we're puritanising the genres of anything more specific so I figured this was a good step. ;] Jotsko (talk) 10:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Which bit do you mean? I found the line "During the mid-1990s, Moonspell and Cradle of Filth brought the gothic approach to black metal" - personally I think that line is alright, as it's not saying that they are the genre "gothic black metal" or whatever, and instead is describing their approach to gothic metal. ≈ The Haunted Angel 11:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sick of this. Everytime I see it. DIMMU BORGIR are the EXACT SAME GENRE as CRADLE OF FILTH. DIMMU BORGIR'S page is listed as BLACK METAL. Get it right. CRADLE OF FILTH ARE BLACK METAL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Dimmu Borgir does not sound anything like Cradle of Filth, nor do they play the same style anymore. Cradle of Filth does not fit into one genre, but rather envelopes many genres. Dimmu Borgir is Symphonic Black Metal or just extreme metal. CoF is Gothic Black Metal or just extreme metal. They sound nothing alike. Undead Warrior (talk) 02:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, Dimmu and Cradle sound worlds apart, frankly. And no, Cradle are not at all true black metal. Listen to Mayhem or Immortal or Gorgoroth, for example, and realise they sound nothing like Cradle. ≈ The Haunted Angel 12:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Firstly I do listen to Mayhem and Gorgorth. But what you are saying is that every group of the same genre has to sound alike. That isnt being original. Cradle are original in their style but they are still using the techinques of Black Metal. So why should they not be listed as Gothic Black Metal!? That is what they are. And to be fair Death Cult Armaggedon by Dimmu is very reminicent of Cralde's style, cant speak for their new music I haven't heard it. Of course they cant sound exactly the same, again, that's the originality of a groups sound. To sound different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

You are missing the point. Cradle of Filth didn't even start out as black metal. They were death metal. I have their first demo's and can easily tell they are no where near black metal. Their only album close to black metal would have been Cruelty and the Beast. The studio albums leading to it still traced large amounts of death metal, and the ones after it started to break away from any discernible genre. Undead Warrior (talk) 15:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I have all those demos too. They are nowhere near Death Metal, that genre isn't in the same league as Cradle. Cradle of Filth were black, into Symphonic Gothic Metal. Death has no musical input, unlike Craldes music. They're msic is intelligent, can no way be considered Death. Not even the old demos. They were Black.

If you truly have the old demo's, including Orgiastic Pleasures Foul, you would see how they are death metal. Early 90's black metal is different than it is now, but still the same in areas. Cradle of Filth started out as a death metal band. If you don't believe me, ask Dani himself. There is a general consensus that Cradle's first demos WERE death metal, and not black metal. Their new stuff is nothing like black metal either. Undead Warrior (talk) 02:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok I'll as him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Alright, so why don't we switch it around a little: instead of gothic, let's make it just goth. Then we can put Black or better yet Blackened in front of that. How does blackened goth metal sound ? I think that best describes their sound. They definitely never were true black metal but had more of BM elements early on (not including the DM demos) and have gotten more and more gothic and commercial as time went on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecarcassman (talkcontribs) 18:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

What happened to the genre box?[edit]

Really, what happened to the genre boxes on *EVERY* band? I don't know where else to ask about this, but since this page seems to see a lot of activity, I'm guessing that someone here might know..Zaruyache (talk) 01:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Here's your answerThe Haunted Angel 02:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Good riddance, too. = ∫tc 5th Eye 03:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Dani's voice progression[edit]

Shouldn't there be a section about his obvious changing in styles over the years, and especially the drastic change visible (or audible) over their most recent works? With Midian Dani's style changed to a more pronounced, "cleaner" style than previous works. Damnation and a Day continued on that style, although with better production. Nymphetamine showed a continuance from the previous style, although with some experimentation with "cleaner" vocals, like on "English Fire." Thornography brought a very different style to Dani's vocalizations, or atleast to the way the the vocal tracks were mixed during recording sessions. Growling became less prevalent, with more high-pitched yelling becoming more prominant. The general sound of Dani's voice also changed with Thornography. It just sounded different. That style was continued on Godspeed on the Devil's Thunder..

Any thoughts on expanding on this charcteristic of the band? Zaruyache (talk) 01:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

The fact that Cradle have evolved from a black metal-esque band over the years has been mentioned, and I think that this would be included in such mention - anything else could be considered WP:ORThe Haunted Angel 01:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I was more really trying to say how Midian, Damnation and Nymphetamine all contained very similar styles, but then with Thornography it sounded almost completely different. It went from dark, evil growling to a more "wimpy" screaming..Not so much wimpy, just lacking that growling aggression. Zaruyache (talk) 15:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like original research to me, but if you can find a reliable source discussing Dani Filth's vocal changes, please feel free to cite it. --Stormie (talk) 23:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I think if you scream for a living for 15 years, your voice is going to change whether it's intentional or not. Plus I'm sure Dani had some sort of gross yeast infection in his lungs or vocal chords sometime around Damnation and a Day, which took him several months to recover from, so that might have had an effect too. Can't find a source we can use though, after a casual google... Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 12:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

No real harm in original research on this subject, I mean anyone who's listened to Nymphetamine and Thornography can tell you that there is a major difference in the overall sound of Dani's vocals. It's more like general knowledge.Zaruyache (talk) 03:02, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Dani sings most of the the last album with clean voice, but growls it on stage. At this point of COF's history we can wonder why he didn't growl on the original records of TMAOO, and if the next album will be recorded with clean voice too. Nico92400 (talk) 12:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

On may 14th the song Right Wing of the Garden Triptych was released, we can hear Dani sing with his growl like before TMAOO. Maybe COF tried clean vocal to get more audience, but the last tour, with older songs and Dani screaming like in late 90's, made fans around the world so enthusiastic that COF know they can make more brutal metal than TMAOO. Nico92400 (talk) 15:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Symphonic Metal[edit]

Jam. DOnUt. Shouldn't this be added to the genre box? Almost all of their albums incorporate symphonic elements, with their newer albums having, what, a 23 piece orchestra performing the symphonics? Extreme Metal makes it seem like any other extreme act..

Or just give my a reason why that symphonic metal (specifically) is not by itself stated as a genre the band plays, aside from the labes of sympho-deathmetal and sympho-blackmetal listed. (talk) 01:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
You do make a valid point; adding symphonic metal wouldn't violate WP:POV in any way - however, I want to see what any other editors have to say about the subject. I'm for the change, if we get enough agreement. Oh, and I believe only Damnation and a Day uses an orchestra - rest of the time it's a keyboard. ≈ The Haunted Angel 02:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if they're synthesizing orchestral stuff into it, or if their keyboards are advanced enough to program in orchestral notes, but Nypmhetamine is quite symphonic. Gabrielle starts off with symphonic instruments, and Nymphetamine Fix features orchestral music as well, so it's not just Damnation that would seem to be using that sort of extravagance. The music seems much too advanced to simply be keyboard-created or synthesized. (talk) 00:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The Prague Philharmonic Orchestra featured on the Nymphetamine album magnius (talk) 01:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


Well that clears that up :P Zaruyache (talk) 00:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh of course - I wasn't doubting that any of their other stuff was symphonic - not at all; I was just remarking that I thought only Damnation featured an actual orchestra -- I'll have to check, but I'm certain that the Prague Orchestra was on Damnation, not Nymphetamine. I could be mistaken however, I will have to check. Still, you do rightly point out that pretty much all their material is symphonic - synthesised or not; so we'll just see if anyone else agrees or disagrees with this notion to change. ≈ The Haunted Angel 00:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
They're on both albums I think, I know they are on Damnation, and they were used again for either Thornogrophy or Nymphetmine...and I am pretty sure it was the latter magnius (talk) 01:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing all three albums, maybe even godspeed as well. Thornography probably features them, considering that Rise of the Pentagram features more symphonic instrumention than most of their songs. Zaruyache (talk) 00:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

From the sleeve notes:
  • Nymphetamine: "Orchestral passages arranged and mixed by the maestrosity Daniel Presley, perfrmed by the Vulgarian Philharmonic". The Bulgarian Philharmonic, or a joke?
  • Thornography: "Orchestral passages arranged and mixed by Daniel Presley". No mention of any actual orchestra, and listed right after the keyboards.
  • Godspeed: "Sinfonia and keys by Mark Newby Robinson". Again no mention of an orchestra. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 08:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Ah, my mistake though. I know that the song "Under Pregnant Skies..." on Thornography was performed mostly by some of the members of Angtoria and I think, their families. Anyway, back to the point in question! Should symphonic metal be added? ≈ The Haunted Angel 13:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

No, you were right. Damnation is the massive Sony one with the Prague Film Orchestra. After that, see above. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

So, should it be added or not? I'm all for it, as you know already. They've used symphonic elements virtually since creation of the band, and not having a live orchestra does not mean that music can not be symphonic. Look at Dragonlord; they only use heavy keyboards and they're considered symphonic black metal. Zaruyache (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

And now it's mid december :D Zaruyache (talk) 19:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello? Any for/against agruements? (talk) 01:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Jam fucking Donut. Against. They have symphonic elements but you can't come out and flat out say they're a symphonic band. It makes them sound like Nightwish. There's nothing remotely symphonic about, say, Gilded Cunt. And if you're going to call them symphonic because they have elements of it sometimes, then you have to then say they also have elements of gothic and black and whatever else, and we're back to calling them blackened symphonic gothic dark death metal again. Leave it alone. It's in the genre section. We give them an umbrella term in the infobox and we explain in detail elsewhere. Why does that upset people so much? Why are people so desperate to clutter up the infobox with this pointless bullshit? Use your energy on something constructive like actually writing something. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 00:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Considering on the section for Damnation and a Day it actually says they turned into symphonic metal, so uh.. yeah.. it should at least be mentioned for that album. Just because gilded cunt isn't completely symphonic doesn't mean it speaks for the rest of their songs. Their earliest stuff to their newest all has symphonics on them. GSotDT has loads of symphony work, especially at the beginnings of songs. Symphonnicc. (talk) 00:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

As the Cardinal said, we use an umbrella term in the infobox and explain in detail elsewhere. For example, the "Sony interlude" section, discussing Damnation and a Day, says "Sony's heavyweight funding underwriting Cradle's undiminished ambition by finally bringing a real orchestra into the studio (the 80-strong Budapest Film Orchestra and Choir replacing the increasingly sophisticated synthesizers of previous albums) and thus marking the band's belated gestation - for one album only - into full-blown symphonic metal". Some detail should be added regarding Godspeed on the Devil's Thunder, I think all mention of it in this article predates the actual release of the album. --Stormie (talk) 03:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


I quit the vocalist sarah from the band members seccion because she is not more with the band now, Dani fire her from the band because she wanted too took the principal vocal place. Go to the ofcial web. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Digimortal (talkcontribs) 17:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Official site still lists her as a band member. Unless you have a source that you can link, please do not remove her again. magnius (talk) 20:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Member section[edit]

I'm wondering why two of the previous members are listed under "Former Member" while the dozen other former members are listed in its own article? And why is Rosie Smith listed there? She only contributed as a live member...

Ahoibakk (talk) 19:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The Genre[edit]

Cradle of Filth should absolutely be listed under Black Metal. That's truly what they are, not only from my personal point of view, but from that of the band themselves. They clearly list themselves as Black Metal on their MySpace page, and are undoubtedly listed as the same on any other site. There may be a genre dispute, but Black Metal is the base of every song by CoF. Extreme Metal hardly describes them at all, it can give false premise to anyone reading about them who hasn't quite heard them. EternalRyche July 4, 2009, 10:55 AM

Go listen to Marduk or Mayhem and get back to me on that :P They're not black metal, at least not the stuff they've put out in the last decade. How would "extreme metal" give someone a false premise to someone reading the article? Do they not know what "Extreme Heavy Metal" is? If not, then they probably won't be looking up CoF's wiki page. The "genre" section does a decent enough explanation of what kind of music they play.Zaruyache (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC).

I think is a relaible source stating they are black metal. Wiki's page content should not be dictated by genre warriors Syxxpackid420 (talk) 01:44, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


Re the brief albums-only discography that was added and then removed.. agreed, Cradle of Filth discography covers the details well, and to a level inappropriate to the main article. But it does look a little strange to have a section which consists solely of a "Main article" link and nothing else.

I took a look at the first 5 bands/musicians in the Wikipedia:Featured articles list - AC/DC, Alice in Chains, Audioslave, Black Francis and Kate Bush - and all five of them have a discography similar to the one Hobosapien20 added (although as a bulleted list not a table). So, taking this as the standard for featured-quality music articles, I have restored that brief album list to the Discography section. --Stormie (talk) 21:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


The link to the album midian actually takes you to the page of midian, not the album. someone might want to fix this —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed --Stormie (talk) 04:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Heavy Funk[edit]

im adding Heavy Funk because i remember him saying on the Buzzcocks that they where Heavy Funk —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:13, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Already there - in the Genre section. You know it was a joke, right? Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 18:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Past members in the infobox[edit]

I've removed this section, since there's an entire separate page for past members, and only including six out of the possible 30-odd isn't really on: surely saying those six are more notable than any of the others constitutes somebody's POV? If there was a way to change the heading to say "selected past members", that might be another matter, although I'm still not sure how you could encyclopaedically justify more significant notability of some past members over others. Thoughts? Magnius has blanked his talk page and refused to deal with this question, despite flinging around accusations of vandalism. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 20:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

They are all notable past members, and you should have discussed this as soon as your opinion was challenged. The past members section is a valid part of an infobox, it wouldn't be there otherwise. We should come to an agreement over which members are worth including and which ones not, rather than just wiping the lot. Certainly, if they have appeared on a studio album then they are in in my opinion. magnius (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Again - "they are all notable members". Yes, and the others? Look at it this way. If this was in the main text of the article, and it said "Cradle has had 30 members, but the most significant are..." and listed half a dozen, you'd be the first to tag that as unsourced POV, and stick a "who?" on it. Why is the infobox different? Just because infoboxes can have that section, doesn't mean they have to. I'd think it was more relevant to bands who've only lost one or two members. It's not designed to cope with revolving-door memberships like Cradle's. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 20:58, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

And lo, Magnius did cease to debate, and instead went off to indulge in his hobby of dancing thrillingly close to the edge of the 3RR... Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 20:10, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the Andrea Meyer linked under Former members is the right Andrea Meyer (it links to a chick-lit writer). I don't have the Wiki-knowhow to fix this, however. It looks like it should be this one Andrea Haugen but apparently she appeared under the name Andrea Meyer, or so that page says. (talk) 14:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

A Missing Video[edit]

Cradle of Filth has a movie called Cradle of Fear and I fail to see it mentioned anywhere in the article.

BallBoo (talk) 13:09, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It's mentioned in the "Music for Nations era (1996-2001)" section. magnius (talk) 13:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Relation between Dimmu Borgir and Cradle of Filth[edit]

Why is Dimmu Borgir mentioned in the infobox as a related article? I see how they are associated acts, for in both bands' long histories I'm sure they've shared some members, as have many more European metal bands. But I don't get how and why only Dimmu Borgir should be mentioned in the infobox. Am I missing somehting obvious here? Is Dani Filth also secretly Shagrath or something obscure like that? Please enlighten me! Thank you ^^ Snikch (talk) 07:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

After perusing List of Cradle of Filth band members and Dimmu Borgir, it looks to me that the sole connection is Nicholas Barker. "He was the original drummer for British metal band Cradle of Filth, playing on the first three albums. After leaving in 1999, he joined Norwegian symphonic black metal band Dimmu Borgir." --Stormie (talk) 05:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Opening sentence[edit]

The content of the opening sentence "The band's musical style evolved from black metal to a cleaner and more "produced" amalgam of gothic metal, symphonic black metal and other extreme metal styles..." is questionable. As a "connoisseur" of heavy metal I would say they have gone from something resembling death metal with symphonic and black metal elements into an mix of gothic metal, traditional heavy metal and symphonic black metal. This is not a sourced statement, but as there is alot of confusion in the world of heavy metal genre, I would say alot of sources are not reliable even if they are published and reputable.

In conclusion the sentance should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Offensive Picture[edit]

The picture on cradle of filth's page that features a nun masturbating is very offensive to some people and every time it was removed it was not vandalism. This needs to be taken off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Well the fact is that this is Wikipedia not a church. Since one of the biggest things about this band is their effort to offend the majority, the picture needs to stay. The incidents involving the shirt were a notable part of the band's history and are more than worth mentioning. So, deleting the picture with no more reason that it hurts peoples' feelings is indeed vandalism.Korylytle (talk) 05:12, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
This has just been anonymously removed again - along with all text relating to it - so I'd like to echo the above, and add that, last time this page was peer-reviewed, it was recommended to us that we include this information and an image to illustrate it. This is a significant part of Cradle's history; it's certainly true that, especially in the 1990s, a lot of people who'd never heard a note of Cradle's music were still aware of the band because of their merchandise, and this is absolutely the most notorious / infamous example. People seem keen to remove it because "it might offend others" (it's never caused offence to the actual remover, you notice). My feeling is that someone likely to be offended by it would be unlikely to stumble across this page by accident. You'd have to actively be looking up Cradle of Filth and this image for the purpose of feeling offended, which would kind of make you the butt of the joke... Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 09:01, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Total Fucking Darkness[edit]

I recall the genre section mentioning a demo called total fucking darkness, which was reminiscent of death metal. I know we can't include it without reliable sources, but does anyone know if there is any truth to this claim? [Unsigned by]

The members page[edit]

I did some much needed revisions and updates on the member page. updated the timeline, extended the members by year to incude 2011 line up changes, added sarah jezebel to the EP's (she was a member at the time, so idk why she wasnt on there already) , included the labels of which each release was released by(i know its not 100% necessary, but it gives the reader an idea of what members were associated with what labels), added that mark newby-robson was credited for orchestrations even though he was listed under keyboards, mentioned that all of the fictional jared demeters contributions to V empire were written and perfformed by stuart, who was also lead guitarist. Jared demeter was played by more than just the 2 mentioned, however this list is a mission for a different day. I Also mentioned when members used other names on recordings so as to match the actual album credits, such as dave pybus who was credited as Herr Pubus on Nymphetamine. Please have a look and tell me what you think. I couldnt find credits for evermore darkly, so i credited it to ashley ellylon since she was the keyoardist/backing vocalist at the time (at least i think she was). if this is incorrect, feel free to correct it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Band members[edit]

Just FYI: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Marthus Škaroupka. My proposed solution is to convert the band members section in this article into subsections with a short summary of the notable members and a short description of the others. - filelakeshoe 15:41, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

That's cool, but probably belongs more at List of Cradle of Filth band members than on the COF page itself. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 23:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

"Studio albums" discussion[edit]

I added Bitter Suites to Succubi to the article's discography section and it was removed. According to the current article on studio albums, it is objectively a studio album. It is too long to be an EP, and does not fall under any other type of release. Just because Dani has called it an EP and people just aren't used to seeing it in the studio album section aren't valid reasons for the contrary. Lachlan Foley (talk) 09:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

But V Empire and From the Cradle to Enslave are album-length studio recordings too, and you seem happy with those as EPs... Honestly, it IS a kind of grey area - I do see where you're coming from - but in terms of Cradle's particular catalogue, it makes more sense to term this as an EP. It was always explicitly described as a stop-gap release - the band were very up-front about that, and Dani being on film calling it "essentially" an EP is not irrelevant, as you seemed to claim the other day. I think that guy's opinion on what it is rather counts for something. It's a handful of new (at the time) songs, with a few extra bits and pieces. It's not part of the sequence of full-on albums - it's just a rattle bag. There was Midian and there was Damnation and a Day, and this was just an almost-throwaway thing in between. That's no reflection on the quality - personally I really like it and I think it gets overlooked. But while technically it may be right to call it a studio album, in this particular case it's more accurate to consider it an EP. That make sense? And not that this is a particularly essential point, but it's been listed as an EP since well before I started working on these pages, and I got here in 2006. So you're the first person in at least six years to have a problem with it.
While we're here, do you also want to talk about Midnight in the Labyrinth? Again, similar argument. It's not part of the main sequence of full-on studio albums. So while technically again, you may be right to call it a studio album, it's also an inessential side-release, entirely built out of old songs (despite their being new versions). So there again, "compilation" is more helpful and accurate than "album", I think. No? Addendum - actually, I wonder if it's better described as a Remix album, like Rob Zombie's Mondo Sex Head or American Made Music to Strip By. But then, "remix" implies something different to me than "orchestral" reworkings...
Anyone else have any thoughts? Richard BB, Stormie, are you listening? Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 09:51, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
It will be down to consensus then. As for Midnight in the Labyrinth, I would immediately class that as a studio album – I personally don't think it matters whether an album is specifically marketed as the being "the next studio album"; I think if it falls under Wikipedia's objective description of a studio album, which both these releases do, then it is one. If not, the description needs to be changed; that is, if it isn't already correct, which I believe it is. Lachlan Foley (talk) 11:03, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
It's not really about "marketing"; it's about "intention", if you like. But there's an inconsistency in your argument, because if you're going by the absolute letter of Wikipedia's own apparent criteria, then you'd have to concede that Midnight is a Remix album: it absolutely "consists of re-recorded versions of earlier released material". Since both Studio album and Remix album are both completely unsourced articles however, I'd say they were pretty worthless as rules. Also, I'm genuinely interested, why are you not making the studio album claim for V Empire, for example? Again, that seems inconsistent according to the rules you're citing. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 12:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
They are poor articles, but since that's all there is at the moment, "studio album" seems to me to still be the closest representation of these two releases. I've never known of a remix album to consist of primarily re-recorded tracks; I have always seen them, as their title suggests, as "re-mixes" of already-recorded music, and would never ever have considered Midnight as such.
I suppose it is subjective what one considers an EP... just from an immediate, unbiased look at Vempire's track listing and length, I would not consider it a studio album, and vice versa with Bitter Suites, which appears to me to be a classic studio album. Bitter Suites is over thirteen minutes longer than Vempire and has ten tracks, as opposed to Vempire's six, which is a contributing factor. Lachlan Foley (talk) 05:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

To me, the studio albums are the ones currently listed on this page. I would not call Midnight a studio album, as the songs are not original -- they are reworks. As for everything else, I agree almost completely with Cardinal Wurzel. I'm not even sure that Bitter Suites is even "technically" a studio album. There are a good chunk of songs that are simply reworks. As such, I wouldn't even have the article read that it's a "stop-gap studio album", Cardinal. I'd change it simply to "EP". – Richard BB 18:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Richard - groovy! And do you reckon "compilation" or "remix" for Midnight?
Lachlan - really, I don't think you're at all as objective or unbiased as you think you are. Your message above admits that both Studio album and Remix album are poor articles, but you then basically say that we should be abiding by Studio album because you personally agree with it, and ignoring Remix album because you don't. That's also not an unbiased opinion about V Empire's length. That disc is, what, 40 minutes long? So purely objectively, since it's ten minutes longer than Reign in Blood and about the same length as the first three Iron Maiden albums, I'd have thought, by your rigid personal rationale, you'd have to call it a studio album. But the point I'm making (and Richard too) is that, within Cradle's particular canon, it's an EP. And within that canon, so's Bitter Suites. It's a subjective thing, but it takes into account the context of the rest of the band's output. That seems logical to me, and apparently to Mr BB too. Again, I'm not quite seeing the internal logic behind your arguments. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 08:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Furthermore, I'd add to that that we aren't allowed to cite Wikipedia as a source. Now, while we're not strictly including a citation in the article, you, Lachlan, are citing the studio album article as a reason why BStS is a studio album. I think it's better to go with what is commonly accepted: that it's an EP. And in answer to your question, Cardinal, although I'm personally fine with it continued to be called a compilation, I think it's more accurate to call it a "remix album". – Richard BB 18:23, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
And just to really ram the point home, all the official press releases, blogs and interviews around The Manticore and Other Horrors so far are describing it as the band's tenth album. Which means... Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 08:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Listing former members[edit]

Matiasmoritz, I do not believe we need all of the former members on the main article, especially given the fact that there are so many of them and that we have a whole article dedicated to them here. Please stop edit warring. – Richard BB 20:25, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

As a side note, do we really need session members on this main article? What do you think, Cardinal Wurzel? – Richard BB 21:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't really care. Short answer no, but if it keeps the peace it's not like them being there is terrible. They're kind of current members... Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 18:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
I'll assume there's no consensus, and leave it as it is. – Richard BB 21:31, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

In popular culture[edit]

Do we need / want an "in popular culture" section? I always think those are really lame - especially when there's only one item in them. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 18:55, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Cool, nobody cares so I'll delete it. The IT Crowd stuff is on the Nymphetamine page anyway. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 08:18, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Actually, the only reason most people in the UK outside of metal fandom have ever heard of CoF is because of the IT Crowd references. --Ef80 (talk) 23:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
That's an incredibly sweeping statement. Can you substantiate it? People outside of metal fandom who watched The IT Crowd, sure. But "most people in the UK"? Really? Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 05:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
It would have been more accurate to write any people in the UK. This isn't an attack on CoF. The various metal genres have zero exposure beyond their various fanbases and the whole point of the IT Crowd joke was that the character was a great fan of a bizarre sounding band of which the audience would be completely unaware. CoF are now familiar to lots of people thanks to the joke, most of which have never heard a note of their music. --Ef80 (talk) 12:15, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm sure you're right; I'm not really arguing. It's just that, as I've said before, it's weak to have an entire 'in popular culture' section that's only got one entry. And those lists are always really just 'we spotted this thing we like in these other things' anyway. I guess we could feed it into the paragraph on the Roadrunner years and Nymphetamine, in the way that it's mentioned on the Nymphetamine page itself. But it just feels a bit, "so what?" They were namechecked on a sitcom. Yay. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 21:27, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
There you go; I added it. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 21:31, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Extreme metal[edit]

I know this has been discussed here much, and extreme metal has been decided on as the infobox genre to maximize neutrality, but in my opinion, it is inaccurate. Gothic metal, which the band has been labelled a lot, generally isn't considered "extreme". In a way, calling the band "extreme metal" isn't neutral either, as some people are quite opinionated as to what exactly that constitutes. I suggest to change it to "extreme metal, dark metal", since dark metal is defined as a "fusion of extreme metal and gothic metal", which I think summarizes the band's style more appropriately.--MASHAUNIX 05:40, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Been there. Talked about that. But thanks for your input. Been a while since any of us had this conversation. I almost miss it. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 23:14, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
So do you not agree that the current infobox genre doesn't summarise their style appropriately, as it doesn't cover gothic metal (which they have often been labelled) at all?--MASHAUNIX 16:14, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
My personal position is that genre labels are nothing but stupid and anal, and the more subdivisions you descend into, the more stupid and anal they get. In terms of this page, what we found during the Dark Years Of The Genre War, which you luckily seem to have missed, is that if you specify any particular genre for this band, someone takes issue with it and it all kicks off again. If you start putting 'gothic' or 'dark' or whatever else you personally think they sound like, I guarantee it will get changed by an anon who thinks they're black metal. And then the black metal brigade will have a tantrum because they hate this band and change it to something else. 'Extreme' turned out just to be the least worst option. Everyone seems OK with the notion that Cradle play some vague sort of extreme metal, and since it got left there the page has actually been really stable. So personally, I'd request you leave it alone. Use your energy to write some content instead and don't get hung up on categories. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 18:51, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I have no opinion, but the only way Wikipedia can cover genres appropriately is to include information based on reliable sources. However, if you say this is stable, it doesn't really matter. So yeah, I'll forget it.--MASHAUNIX 22:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the trouble - there aren't really any reliable sources; just blow-hard interbloggers with opinions (not meaning you). The band don't engage with the issue (if it is an issue). The only place people really argue about it is on Wikipedia! Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Darren White[edit]

Darren J. White (also Ex-Singer of Anathema) never played drums. Metal Archives is also wrong on that. Original Drummer was "Darren Garden" it seems: of Filth-Eng/cradle of filth.asp. (talk) 15:02, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Cheers for that. Have corrected the members page. Looks like the confusion is they both go/went by "Daz". Plus White did some vocals on Cradle's first album, and Cradle covered an Anathema song, so there's also that relationship that's obviously lead everyone astray! Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 07:34, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Genre according to Encyclopedia Metallum[edit]

I think that when it comes to the genre, we should it put like Encyclopedia Metallum did, they kinda know better. MaggotSupremacy555 (talk) 11:56, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

=Metal Archives is just written by random punters with accounts, in exactly the same way as Wikipedia. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 20:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cradle of Filth. 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}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:14, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Systemic music[edit]

Black Metal was a movement against the Christian elite. Nowadays the youth knows that the story of Jesus is a boring old lie. Cradle of Filth failed to attack Christian Monarchy and peerage, but also all the Christian UK flags. In UK not only the National but many regional flags include a Christian cross.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cradle of Filth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:28, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Genre field can be given genres?[edit]

Recently, Evanescence and Celtic Frost, 2 bands that didn't get any genres added to their genre field, just got genres added to their genre field. Sometimes genre debates over bands go down. HIM is another band that couldn't have their own genre field but now do. I think we can do it with Cradle of Filth. Some people don't like to call Dimmu Borgir black metal but they're still black metal (symphonic black metal, specifically). Metallum were able to call Cradle of Filth's older stuff black metal. Genres added to the genre field will be sourced genres. Lets see how it goes. Statik N (talk) 23:57, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Cradle of Filth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:09, 9 December 2017 (UTC)