![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I thought that was their best single (As in airplay). Its still being played here in Holland, Mi-- User:NFAN3|NFAN3 21:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
This is About the band Just being Hard Rock or add to the Genre Nu Metal
Just hard rock and in some cases metal but not NU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 15:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC) User:Skateremorocker
It sounds like my friend Laura who is obsessed with this band.
One may want to add to this article the fact that this band has a song on this compilation cd. - EdGl 01:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
GO FOR IT!! Bacl-presby 00:35, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Done. - EdGl 03:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Not sure how many others they're on, but I know their song Rawkfist was on X: 2004. There might even be others out there as well. -- Az 03:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
"Everyone Like Me" was on X 2005, "Move" was on X 2006, and "Absolute" was on X 2007. Also, I have never heard of X Worship 2006, but I have heard of, and own, X Worship, which has "Breath You In". Saksjn 12:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
"Move" was on the Parachute 2007 and Absolute was the Parachute 2006 record. 9:06, 24th August 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116Rebel ( talk • contribs) 09:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh, don't forget that "Bounce" was on X 2003. -- JY23 ( talk) 00:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
I know Jamie Aplin is the touring guitarist for TFK, but has he ever officially been mentioned as the full-time guitarist? I know I might be splitting hairs here, but on every TFK disc, Trevor has gotten the credit for guitars. Should we change Jamie's stature in the band? Roofi's Publicist 20:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
He always gets back-up gutiarist credits on the songs, while whoever else is with the band at the time gets the lead. In concert, he only sings. Saksjn 12:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I can't for the life of me figure out the name of this song. The site I found it at said it was Phenomenon by Thousand Foot Krutch. I have that song, and this isn't it. I've looked up lyrics for their songs at WikiLyrics, but it's not there. It goes something like this:
{{Lyrics are COPYVIO. Removed by Dan, the CowMan 02:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)}}
Can anyone tell me what this song is? -- RockMaster 02:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
TFK recorded a song called Rude Awakening (Since called Home, here on the internet) and distributed 100 copies of it on CD. This website has the story on the song. How should we go about adding this to the wiki article?
Here is the text from the above site:
E-mail from Trevor McNevan, lead vocalist of Thousand Foot Krutch, to another TFK fan and TFK fan site webmaster:
"'Home' is actually called 'Rude Awakening'(I'm not sure why someone called it 'home' on the net), and is a song I wrote and recorded by myself. It's just a demo version(still ruff), but I have fun writing a lot of my own stuff on the side. This song was inspired by Cassey Bernall, the girl who was shot and killed in the Columbine high school shootings. She stood up for what she believed in, and wasn't afraid to die for it. That really spoke to me, would you and I stand up for God if it meant death? It's a deep question. A question that can only be truly answered by a 'History Maker'. I hope you dig it man. If it's alright, can you pass this on to anyone who's heard the song to give them a little background on it? Thanks again, "
Trev(vocalist/songwriter for TFK)
"I found out a little more about the song.Some of it was already posted here about Trevor being inspired by the Columbine shooting, but there is more.
They were not allowed to play the song when they were in Columbine last year (understandaby, at the time the students there were very sensitive to the issue) so instead they burned 100 copies onto cds and were allowed to sell them at the show.
All 100 copies were sold.
There will NOT be any more official versions of these discs made. they were made with out the permission of the record company (Who technically owns all TFK recordings made while under contract). If you have one of these discs, it is even more rare than Oddball or Thats What People Do."
Kerry (Official Thousand Foot Krutch Site Web Design)
Any help on this would be greatly appreaciated ColdShoulder 16:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
I've created a stub on Rawkfist and you guys should take a look. Saksjn 02:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I tried to add a picture but all I could do is add a link to the picture, could some-one help
Image:02 TFK Photo 2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Free images can be taken from the official TFK ecards. The images are available to the public for use as desktop wallpapers, so I would assume that using them as a promotional image is fully legal under the fair use rationale.
Jcpizzadude 19:53, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Why do people constantly want to make sure this band is labled "christian rock" I see nothing on their website, myspace, purevolume, or lyrics that imply a direct association with "christian music" They are not marketed as such either, even though there are bands associated with CCM on tooth and nail, many are just simply bands, I see no evidence as to why TFK, isn't simply just a band as well. Logically isn't christianity a faith, not a genre, and regardless of weather or not the band members claim to be christians, why would the type of music be labled different because of the band member's spirituality? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.201.192.24 ( talk) 22:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Read the lyrics to supafly, unbelievable, this is a call and small town - all of those say Jesus or christ. Last words says the word god and also points out "Life is more than just a game you're playing"
Apart from that there was something on a website where the new album was mentioned that the name of god continues to influence the groups music, so many songs must be focused on him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 17:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
also, they have gotten number ones like "Absolute" on christianrock.net, and other singles charting there.
They are playing a teen christian concert.
Wow I can't belive there is some small debate about their Christianity just listen to their song Breath you in its so obvious and I went to a concert with only Christian bands and it was in a church and at the concert they made it pretty clear.
The point the original poster was making is that most of their songs have nothing to do with Christianity. Some do, perhaps - from their old album mind you - but for the most part their lyrics have absolutely nothing to do with christianity. It's a pity they have to be market themselves as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.64.237 ( talk) 18:08, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Questioning their Christian Rock Heritage is simply the most ignorant thing I have ever seen on Wikipedia. -- Teacherbrock ( talk) 17:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
These guys are not rapcore, they past two albums haven't been, so if people insist on having the genre put up, I insist in brackets we put (earlier albums) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 15:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think NU metal should be on the genre list, since only phenomenom deserves that label so saying early wouldnt be properly correct. It wouldn't make sense to put phenomenom in brackets either, so i'm removing it from the genres.
MATT 14 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt 14 ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
There should be a Template:ThousandFootKrutch, How do you make one of those, like the Template:RelientK one?
Why is it not said that The art of breaking album has a DVD on it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.67.47 ( talk) 19:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I understand most genres on the front page but then you have silly ones that are obviously not right like christcore (christian hardcore) and christian metal, until these two can be sourced i'm removing them both.
What's carzy about Christian hardcore its in many of their songs like Hand grenades Falls apart Move and The art of breaking.
Although Christian metal is ridiculous.
well the art of breaking and move and falls apart has no hardcore. i suppose inhuman and slow bleed has some, but if anything its an influence, not one of their genres. for example some bands are influenced by classical music, but it is not always one of their music genres. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pessimistemo32 ( talk • contribs) 13:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
That's true but still I think they are Christian hardcore even if its only two or three songs we understand.
Ok, so rise against have 2 or 3 acoustic songs recorded in their career, is it acceptable to put acoustic rock on their genres? what do you think? im using this as a comparison for the TFK article, or how about the starting line? can we label them acoustic rock for their short EP they made of acoustic songs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 21:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC) Fine your right about that but it says Hard rock and their is no Christian hard rock genre in wikipedia so I write Christian hardcore and if you remove that then just remove Hard rock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.66.220 ( talk) 21:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
What about Rapcore that's only in one album and its only a few songs and its still here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.155.141 ( talk) 21:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
why do people keep on adding really stupid genres to the page like Heavy metal or Christian Metal, and also remember only phenomenom falls under NU metal, the early stuff was rapcore/christian rock. At least source them then I won't take any genres off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thrice34 ( talk • contribs) 21:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
what are you talking about? heavy metal, they are a hard rock/heavy metal band. and christian metal, there more christian metal than christian rock. And what do you mean only phenomenon falls under nu metal. what about set it off? thats way more nu metal than phenomenon. the only nu metal song in phenomenon is bounce. your the rediculous one, not these genres. In fact see what i got coming in next -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 23:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Well heavy metal has growling screamed vocals, do TFK? no, they are hard rock. How can you say Set if off is nu metal, its rap/rock songs like "All the way live" "supafly" "rhime animal" and "unbelievable" then you get a good rock song like "everyone like me" or a ballad like "sweet unknown" or "small town" or the rawk song "the alternative song" on phenomenom you get less rap, more heavy riffs and Korn influence, the prominent band of new metal. Most songs on Phenomenom have heavy riffs, no chugging or screamings, yet the riffs have some sort of metal feel, must be NU metal. As for them being a christian metal band, they call themselves rock, and anyway the riffs and vocals arent exactly metal, and between the two latest albums there are many softer slower songs far removed from anything metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 00:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
apart from that more pre phenomenom songs like Moment of the day and when in doubt have nothing to do with nu metal either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 12:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
heavy metal doesnt have screaming growling vocals, screamo does, theres a difference. stryper is a christian metal band and they dont scream and/or growl. underoath is a christian screamo band and they do scream and growl. tfk is hard rock/heavy metal. and nu metal is rap metal -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 15:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay so I toke out that ridiclous users things because now i relized I was the one being a little ridiculous. However put christian hardcore was deffinatly wrong. and i understand more clearly now what you guys are saying. I thought that nu metal was rap metal but now i relized that theres a difference. I'm sorry for the way i responded. But i still do think that songs such as rawkfist, ordinary, and puppet are heavy metal. but songs such as move, everyone like me, and the flame in all of us are hard rock. then they have really soft songs like brother john is pop punk and this is a call is acoustic rock. I'd say there main genre is Christian Rock and then hard rock. I'm very sorry for being a complete idiot. I relized that the way I responded was mean. Once Again, I am very sorry. -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 02:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC) They are Christian hardcore how can you not see that! Just listen to almost every song in The art of breaking and Falls apart and I don't know anymore songs by them but when i do you'll see. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.235.118 ( talk) 18:12, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, so I guess they are Christian Hardcore. But I still say that Rawkfist is a Christian Metal song-- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 01:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I heard rumors that the flame in all of us is there last cd. thats what dudes are saying on youtube. if these rumors are true. the bands active years would be 1997-2007. -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 16:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
That's not their last album. Who said that it was I went to a concert in november and that album was released in the summer so their not done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.33.172 ( talk) 23:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
well some of the comments on youtube say that it is there last album but hey dont beleive evreything you read on the internet -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 20:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
i hav also had a suspicion tho that the last track on the flame, 'The Last Song' may be what its title implies. do u hav a link 2 the videos out of curiousity? Jcpizzadude ( talk) 14:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=uF_YTSP6cvw comment is on page 7, although it may change by the time you check so if you dont see it keep looking -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 20:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Don't belive anything you hear about them on the web unless its from Trevor mcneven. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.235.86 ( talk) 19:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
good point dude -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 21:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
true...they may say something about it on tour w/skillet —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcpizzadude ( talk • contribs) 13:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
maybe -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 19:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok heres some things to consider
They're active years would be 1997-2008 if they broke up now techically. All american rejects did a song called "the last song" but they are still going and have had albums since then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 12:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
So basicly nobody thinks they have broken up. and here's something else to thing about. If they broke up then they would have said something and their would be a goodby tour most likely and I was at a concert and they didn't say anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.146.211 ( talk) 20:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
christian hardcore is not one of the genres. that is a form of metalcore as the article will state if you read it, and is what you'd call "no innocent victim" plus hardcore is hardcore punk it doesnt mean heavy music or anything like that, and tfk have very little to do with punk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thrice34 ( talk • contribs) 12:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Why does it say they are Christian metal or Nu metal or anything of that nature? They have no songs containing Screams, Growls, Metal guitars or anything involving metal! If they where at all considered metal they would have to be Unblack metal due to their lighter guitars and screams with no growl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.82.38 ( talk) 23:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
And they are not NU metal!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.146.158 ( talk) 16:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Um, no? Metal does not have contain growls to be Metal, and they wouldn't be Unblack because they don't scream...at all...Nu metal is accurate for their earlier stuff, but they're more Alternative Rock nowadays... Green Runner 0 21:27, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I just edited the article because TFK are a Christian rock band not a Christian Rock band, the latter is suggesting they are just christians in a rock band, but in truth they are a band who plays christian rock music
loveyourfaith
Loveyourfaith (
talk)
21:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Who the hell cares? It's not like any of their recent music has anything to do with christianity.
Ok so at least put Christian Rock band (rock band with all christian members) u may deny they are a Christian rock band but its up to no debate they are a Christian Rock band theres a difference between the two.
loveyourfaith Loveyourfaith ( talk) 19:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Their religion is irrelevant to the lead, it is for their genre. In genre related terms their not a 'Christian band'
Landon1980 (
talk)
22:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
But what about there song new drug which is clearly christian rock or there song puppet which if you listen you can see is christian rock and falls apart is aslo chrristian rock and breath you in is and as soon as I can find more reasons saying they are christian I will post them.
And post your reasons before you change it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.160.221 ( talk) 23:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok,whoever keeps changing the artical back must not have any good reasons to change it so if anyone knows how to block him please do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.151.200 ( talk) 21:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
"TFK is a christian band, they participate in christian events like the Creation Festival ( http://www.creationfest.com/ne/program.php) and play shows in churchs, and i have the álbum "Phenomenon", these guys are christians." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacheco Mortification ( talk • contribs) 03:41, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
"Who the hell cares? It's not like any of their recent music has anything to do with christianity." Their albums are flooded with religious overtones... Still, Wikipedia isn't the place for personal ideals on band lyrical approaches. The band considers their music to be Christian music and there's sources to back it. Remember, just because the music is labeled as such does not mean their music is "just for Christians" or contains a fireball sermons about infidels and crackheads. 74.5.111.155 ( talk) 02:27, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I've got an idea, there's been plenty of debate on almost every band's talk page concerning their genre. A general rule of thumb for ANY WP article is that there should be third-party, verifiable, reliable citations for any claims. Therefore, I suggest that any genre's that can be shown to be cited in external media (the band's claims such as in myspace/last.fm/etc themselves are considered first-person, and unfortunately cannot be used). There should be plenty of sources for any legitimate genre claims. How does this sound? Wikiwikikid ( talk) 17:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
We don't need to sorce christian metal or christian rock or any christian gernre with this band cause all people who know anything about them know they're a christian band with christian lyrics and I've heard alot of people say this artical is unreliable because they say they don't do christian music.
Do other editors wish to have this genre included? I don't have a problem with the genre I just want to see it sourced properly. I hate adding a genre just because one source says 'Christian rock' in a categories section along with alt rock (shows they don't even know the difference) then the source has a review and sure doesn't mention Christian rock. It needs a reliable source that definitively says their genre is Christian rock. Landon1980 ( talk) 15:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
"Remember that wikipedia only reports the facts as they are in reliable sources, regardless of editors' personal feelings on the matters."
Ok I agree. That being the case you need to add a category section and leave it out of the genres. I have looked all morning and there seem to be no other sources that deem the band Christian rock. Calling them 'Christian rockers' such as mtv, vh1, etc., but they then go on to say they are "Christian themed rap" As for alternative rock, no other source backs up that claim. Stop shoving policy down my throat, I am aware of all existing policies and guidelines. Landon1980 ( talk) 19:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Also, will you point me to the policy that says "if it's published it's reliable" Landon1980 ( talk) 19:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh for god's sake...here we go again. Landon, why on earth have you gone and removed those two genres -again-? I thought this had finally been settled. You claim they are questionable: why? The source -is- valid, it -does- call them those genres. You personally may not agree with it, but your personal view has no bearing on this.
Also, I seem to recall you claiming that I was "gaming" the 3RR, something I'd like to stress I've never done before. Yet here you are doing precisely that: waiting and then reverting yet again. Supply a -very good- reason for your last revert here or I'll simply take this to a mediation board. I really do say this for your own good: quit while you're ahead. Prophaniti ( talk) 23:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
You need to read over the npa policy, attacking the editor in any way is violating it. Whether it be my logic or my shoe size doesn't matter. Saying my logic is foolish is saying I am foolish. Like you said, Wikipedia is based on verifiability. We do not have to take the word of one database, but we can listen to what reliable sourcs in general are saying. You are all over wikipedia shoving musicmight down the throat of fellow editors, and edit warring on multiple articles. You have got to understand that just because one database says something doesn't mean it has to be added. Landon1980 ( talk) 13:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi all! I have accepted this case. I've briefly looked through the debate so far and just doing a bit of background research it seems, initially at least, that this band has been described as a Christian rock band in multiple locations; such as here (called "Christian music"), here (it describes a well-known "Christian rock" festival), here (Lists it as under the "Christian rock" genre), and it seems that they are recognized as "gospel music" artists, being nominated for the GMA awards here. Others describe them as simply Christian musicians; such as here. Still others seem to describe them as Christian musicians; such as here. And still other's as simply Christian; such as here. This band was up for a Juno Awards under the category ""Contemporary Christian/Gospel Album" as can be seen here.
It certainly seems that their music has a strong religious, praise or Christian aspect to it. (NB: not all sources are WP:RS compliant but it shows a strong public perception of their genre.
Comments? :-) fr33k man t - c 20:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
BTW: Before this is fully over, Prophaniti ( talk · contribs) needs to weigh in to be fair of us. fr33k man t - c 02:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Two perfectly valid sources have now been provied for christian rock, allmusic and NME. Landon1980 continues to remove the sources. Landon, why? Both are perfectly valid sources, one describes them as "christian rock" the other as "christian metal". Given metal is a subgenre of rock, this gives us two fine sources for christian rock. Either would be enough, given the lack of sources on this page. Can you give any good reason for your removal of this information before it's taken to third opinion? Prophaniti ( talk) 14:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Being able to source their religion doesn't make it infobox material. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
206.53.144.85 (
talk)
12:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Will someone show me where the consensus for Christian rock is I can't find it on this page. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
206.53.144.121 (
talk)
20:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
I want to point out that most sources refer to the band as "Christian rockers" and not a Christian rock band, like MTV has done. Being Christians does not automatically make them a Christian band. Landon1980 ( talk) 02:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Something to note: while Precious Roy is putting forward a fine argument, it’s all somewhat irrelevant: I provided a source, allmusic, for christian rock. Not “a rock band that happens to be christian”, but under the genre heading “Christian rock”. Allmusic is an accepted source (I think this might be the root of the problem here for you Landon, since you seem unaware of how much it's accepted on wikipedia), and it says, unequivocally, that they are christian rock. That’s all there is to it. When you have a source like that you don’t need consensus. Remember, reliable sources always outweigh any number of wikipedia editor opinions. So even if 100 editors were against it, christian rock is going into the genre field. Prophaniti ( talk) 15:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm not going to respond properly to an obvious sore loser, Landon. It's painfully apparent that you won't accept wiki policy where it conflict with your POV and will do all you can to try to undermine things. Just deal with it and move on. Prophaniti ( talk) 22:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
[edit conflict] I notice that Landon1980 has dropped the consensus argument but was quick to latch onto Prophaniti's "single source". What about all the other sources that Fr33kman linked to? The bottom line: There are sources that say they are Christian rock and the consensus on the talk page is to include Christian rock in the infobox. I don't see why this argument is continuing. Also, Landon1980, you really should stop trying to goad Prophaniti into getting him/herself blocked; that's really not the way that editors work together. Just because you didn't get your way doesn't mean you shouldn't act civilly to those you disagree with. Precious Roy ( talk) 22:07, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE for starters. Seriously though, I'd rather shoot myself in the foot as talk to you. By plucking one of three genres out of the bunch and making it dominant you violate our NPOV policy. Unless you can provide a reliable source that definitively says they are almost always defined as 'Christian rock' you do not have a case. As of now it is one of several, all with reliable sources. Look around wikipedia, this is done very frequently, listing the general term is very accurate, doesn't pick sides, and cuts down on edit warring. Landon1980 ( talk) 22:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
After an initial disagreement and further conversation with User:Landon1980 I agree that the lead-in sentence, rather than just being the most vague, should be the most substantiated genre. While I was under the impression that they were most commonly referred to as a Christian rock band, I've searched through some genre sources along with the ones already provided, and most sources I've found definitely say "rock." If anyone seeks to change the lead-in genre to Christian rock, please provide evidence to substantiate this claim (a substantial number of acceptable sources) that they are primarily Christian rock rather than rock. If you have an opinion or know of policy contrary to this, please feel free to share it so that we can take this into consideration, and happy editting! Wikiwikikid ( talk) 16:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Nu-metal? Still? Isn't Nu-metal along the lines of Korn, specifically their older material? 74.5.110.177 ( talk) 14:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I was just wondering, since there is already a Welcome to the Masquerade page, why can't we add info about it if it has already been confirmed. I tried to, but Landon1980 undid it saying, "wait until it is released." I just want to know why you're waiting. Charlitus54 ( talk) 07:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah... I see... now I understand. Well, I found on toothandnail.com that the release is September 8, and I'm guessing that's a reliable source. I'm about to add it. thanks for the help, Charlitus54 ( talk) 02:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Should a separate page be made for the single "Fire it up" as it has charted, and is featured in so many games, ads and trailers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116Rebel ( talk • contribs) 09:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Trevor McNevan also has another side project as a rapper/artist in Manafest. Needs to be included somewhere see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_ew-jMy794
Look, everyone stop fighting. This text is inappropriate on the grounds that it's total original research. Who's to say that that song is the band's "most commercial success"? Adding a Wikipedia article as a source for that doesn't work on two fronts: one, it's a link to a Rock Band article and has nothing to do with commercial success per se, and two, Wiki isn't a reliable source. So stop adding this text - the anon IP has already passed 3RR twice. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 19:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Stepping back. This is the body of the text at the last point. The only edits I've made is linking internally to the wikipedia article and making it a sup instead of a ref, and placing citation requests in the questionable sections to help clarify matters for the anonymous editor.
The bands most commercial success citation needed to date came with the release of their single Fire It Up, which has been used in many movies citation needed, as well as being included as a downloadable track for Rock Band 2. 1
I hope this clears up the issue without having it digress further into an edit war. -- Walter Görlitz ( talk) 20:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
This article has major sourcing issues. The band passes the notability bar with the albums charting, so that is not an issue, but an incredible amount of this informatino is effectively OR. of the 39 "refs", 3 of them are actual RS in depth fact sources. The vast, overwhelming, majority are dead, self-published,PR, twitter/facebook/blog, or database dumps. This really needs to be cleaned up and things sourced correctly. I am tagging the article accordingly. Gaijin42 ( talk) 20:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Here is a breakdown of the sources currently used :
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I thought that was their best single (As in airplay). Its still being played here in Holland, Mi-- User:NFAN3|NFAN3 21:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
This is About the band Just being Hard Rock or add to the Genre Nu Metal
Just hard rock and in some cases metal but not NU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 15:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC) User:Skateremorocker
It sounds like my friend Laura who is obsessed with this band.
One may want to add to this article the fact that this band has a song on this compilation cd. - EdGl 01:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
GO FOR IT!! Bacl-presby 00:35, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Done. - EdGl 03:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Not sure how many others they're on, but I know their song Rawkfist was on X: 2004. There might even be others out there as well. -- Az 03:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
"Everyone Like Me" was on X 2005, "Move" was on X 2006, and "Absolute" was on X 2007. Also, I have never heard of X Worship 2006, but I have heard of, and own, X Worship, which has "Breath You In". Saksjn 12:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
"Move" was on the Parachute 2007 and Absolute was the Parachute 2006 record. 9:06, 24th August 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116Rebel ( talk • contribs) 09:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh, don't forget that "Bounce" was on X 2003. -- JY23 ( talk) 00:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
I know Jamie Aplin is the touring guitarist for TFK, but has he ever officially been mentioned as the full-time guitarist? I know I might be splitting hairs here, but on every TFK disc, Trevor has gotten the credit for guitars. Should we change Jamie's stature in the band? Roofi's Publicist 20:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
He always gets back-up gutiarist credits on the songs, while whoever else is with the band at the time gets the lead. In concert, he only sings. Saksjn 12:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I can't for the life of me figure out the name of this song. The site I found it at said it was Phenomenon by Thousand Foot Krutch. I have that song, and this isn't it. I've looked up lyrics for their songs at WikiLyrics, but it's not there. It goes something like this:
{{Lyrics are COPYVIO. Removed by Dan, the CowMan 02:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)}}
Can anyone tell me what this song is? -- RockMaster 02:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
TFK recorded a song called Rude Awakening (Since called Home, here on the internet) and distributed 100 copies of it on CD. This website has the story on the song. How should we go about adding this to the wiki article?
Here is the text from the above site:
E-mail from Trevor McNevan, lead vocalist of Thousand Foot Krutch, to another TFK fan and TFK fan site webmaster:
"'Home' is actually called 'Rude Awakening'(I'm not sure why someone called it 'home' on the net), and is a song I wrote and recorded by myself. It's just a demo version(still ruff), but I have fun writing a lot of my own stuff on the side. This song was inspired by Cassey Bernall, the girl who was shot and killed in the Columbine high school shootings. She stood up for what she believed in, and wasn't afraid to die for it. That really spoke to me, would you and I stand up for God if it meant death? It's a deep question. A question that can only be truly answered by a 'History Maker'. I hope you dig it man. If it's alright, can you pass this on to anyone who's heard the song to give them a little background on it? Thanks again, "
Trev(vocalist/songwriter for TFK)
"I found out a little more about the song.Some of it was already posted here about Trevor being inspired by the Columbine shooting, but there is more.
They were not allowed to play the song when they were in Columbine last year (understandaby, at the time the students there were very sensitive to the issue) so instead they burned 100 copies onto cds and were allowed to sell them at the show.
All 100 copies were sold.
There will NOT be any more official versions of these discs made. they were made with out the permission of the record company (Who technically owns all TFK recordings made while under contract). If you have one of these discs, it is even more rare than Oddball or Thats What People Do."
Kerry (Official Thousand Foot Krutch Site Web Design)
Any help on this would be greatly appreaciated ColdShoulder 16:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
I've created a stub on Rawkfist and you guys should take a look. Saksjn 02:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I tried to add a picture but all I could do is add a link to the picture, could some-one help
Image:02 TFK Photo 2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Free images can be taken from the official TFK ecards. The images are available to the public for use as desktop wallpapers, so I would assume that using them as a promotional image is fully legal under the fair use rationale.
Jcpizzadude 19:53, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Why do people constantly want to make sure this band is labled "christian rock" I see nothing on their website, myspace, purevolume, or lyrics that imply a direct association with "christian music" They are not marketed as such either, even though there are bands associated with CCM on tooth and nail, many are just simply bands, I see no evidence as to why TFK, isn't simply just a band as well. Logically isn't christianity a faith, not a genre, and regardless of weather or not the band members claim to be christians, why would the type of music be labled different because of the band member's spirituality? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.201.192.24 ( talk) 22:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Read the lyrics to supafly, unbelievable, this is a call and small town - all of those say Jesus or christ. Last words says the word god and also points out "Life is more than just a game you're playing"
Apart from that there was something on a website where the new album was mentioned that the name of god continues to influence the groups music, so many songs must be focused on him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 17:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
also, they have gotten number ones like "Absolute" on christianrock.net, and other singles charting there.
They are playing a teen christian concert.
Wow I can't belive there is some small debate about their Christianity just listen to their song Breath you in its so obvious and I went to a concert with only Christian bands and it was in a church and at the concert they made it pretty clear.
The point the original poster was making is that most of their songs have nothing to do with Christianity. Some do, perhaps - from their old album mind you - but for the most part their lyrics have absolutely nothing to do with christianity. It's a pity they have to be market themselves as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.64.237 ( talk) 18:08, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Questioning their Christian Rock Heritage is simply the most ignorant thing I have ever seen on Wikipedia. -- Teacherbrock ( talk) 17:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
These guys are not rapcore, they past two albums haven't been, so if people insist on having the genre put up, I insist in brackets we put (earlier albums) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 15:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think NU metal should be on the genre list, since only phenomenom deserves that label so saying early wouldnt be properly correct. It wouldn't make sense to put phenomenom in brackets either, so i'm removing it from the genres.
MATT 14 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt 14 ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
There should be a Template:ThousandFootKrutch, How do you make one of those, like the Template:RelientK one?
Why is it not said that The art of breaking album has a DVD on it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.67.47 ( talk) 19:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I understand most genres on the front page but then you have silly ones that are obviously not right like christcore (christian hardcore) and christian metal, until these two can be sourced i'm removing them both.
What's carzy about Christian hardcore its in many of their songs like Hand grenades Falls apart Move and The art of breaking.
Although Christian metal is ridiculous.
well the art of breaking and move and falls apart has no hardcore. i suppose inhuman and slow bleed has some, but if anything its an influence, not one of their genres. for example some bands are influenced by classical music, but it is not always one of their music genres. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pessimistemo32 ( talk • contribs) 13:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
That's true but still I think they are Christian hardcore even if its only two or three songs we understand.
Ok, so rise against have 2 or 3 acoustic songs recorded in their career, is it acceptable to put acoustic rock on their genres? what do you think? im using this as a comparison for the TFK article, or how about the starting line? can we label them acoustic rock for their short EP they made of acoustic songs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 21:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC) Fine your right about that but it says Hard rock and their is no Christian hard rock genre in wikipedia so I write Christian hardcore and if you remove that then just remove Hard rock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.66.220 ( talk) 21:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
What about Rapcore that's only in one album and its only a few songs and its still here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.155.141 ( talk) 21:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
why do people keep on adding really stupid genres to the page like Heavy metal or Christian Metal, and also remember only phenomenom falls under NU metal, the early stuff was rapcore/christian rock. At least source them then I won't take any genres off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thrice34 ( talk • contribs) 21:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
what are you talking about? heavy metal, they are a hard rock/heavy metal band. and christian metal, there more christian metal than christian rock. And what do you mean only phenomenon falls under nu metal. what about set it off? thats way more nu metal than phenomenon. the only nu metal song in phenomenon is bounce. your the rediculous one, not these genres. In fact see what i got coming in next -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 23:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Well heavy metal has growling screamed vocals, do TFK? no, they are hard rock. How can you say Set if off is nu metal, its rap/rock songs like "All the way live" "supafly" "rhime animal" and "unbelievable" then you get a good rock song like "everyone like me" or a ballad like "sweet unknown" or "small town" or the rawk song "the alternative song" on phenomenom you get less rap, more heavy riffs and Korn influence, the prominent band of new metal. Most songs on Phenomenom have heavy riffs, no chugging or screamings, yet the riffs have some sort of metal feel, must be NU metal. As for them being a christian metal band, they call themselves rock, and anyway the riffs and vocals arent exactly metal, and between the two latest albums there are many softer slower songs far removed from anything metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 00:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
apart from that more pre phenomenom songs like Moment of the day and when in doubt have nothing to do with nu metal either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 12:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
heavy metal doesnt have screaming growling vocals, screamo does, theres a difference. stryper is a christian metal band and they dont scream and/or growl. underoath is a christian screamo band and they do scream and growl. tfk is hard rock/heavy metal. and nu metal is rap metal -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 15:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay so I toke out that ridiclous users things because now i relized I was the one being a little ridiculous. However put christian hardcore was deffinatly wrong. and i understand more clearly now what you guys are saying. I thought that nu metal was rap metal but now i relized that theres a difference. I'm sorry for the way i responded. But i still do think that songs such as rawkfist, ordinary, and puppet are heavy metal. but songs such as move, everyone like me, and the flame in all of us are hard rock. then they have really soft songs like brother john is pop punk and this is a call is acoustic rock. I'd say there main genre is Christian Rock and then hard rock. I'm very sorry for being a complete idiot. I relized that the way I responded was mean. Once Again, I am very sorry. -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 02:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC) They are Christian hardcore how can you not see that! Just listen to almost every song in The art of breaking and Falls apart and I don't know anymore songs by them but when i do you'll see. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.235.118 ( talk) 18:12, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, so I guess they are Christian Hardcore. But I still say that Rawkfist is a Christian Metal song-- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 01:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I heard rumors that the flame in all of us is there last cd. thats what dudes are saying on youtube. if these rumors are true. the bands active years would be 1997-2007. -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 16:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
That's not their last album. Who said that it was I went to a concert in november and that album was released in the summer so their not done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.33.172 ( talk) 23:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
well some of the comments on youtube say that it is there last album but hey dont beleive evreything you read on the internet -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 20:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
i hav also had a suspicion tho that the last track on the flame, 'The Last Song' may be what its title implies. do u hav a link 2 the videos out of curiousity? Jcpizzadude ( talk) 14:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=uF_YTSP6cvw comment is on page 7, although it may change by the time you check so if you dont see it keep looking -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 20:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Don't belive anything you hear about them on the web unless its from Trevor mcneven. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.235.86 ( talk) 19:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
good point dude -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 21:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
true...they may say something about it on tour w/skillet —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcpizzadude ( talk • contribs) 13:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
maybe -- Mr. Comedian ( talk) 19:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok heres some things to consider
They're active years would be 1997-2008 if they broke up now techically. All american rejects did a song called "the last song" but they are still going and have had albums since then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.65.47 ( talk) 12:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
So basicly nobody thinks they have broken up. and here's something else to thing about. If they broke up then they would have said something and their would be a goodby tour most likely and I was at a concert and they didn't say anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.146.211 ( talk) 20:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
christian hardcore is not one of the genres. that is a form of metalcore as the article will state if you read it, and is what you'd call "no innocent victim" plus hardcore is hardcore punk it doesnt mean heavy music or anything like that, and tfk have very little to do with punk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thrice34 ( talk • contribs) 12:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Why does it say they are Christian metal or Nu metal or anything of that nature? They have no songs containing Screams, Growls, Metal guitars or anything involving metal! If they where at all considered metal they would have to be Unblack metal due to their lighter guitars and screams with no growl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.82.38 ( talk) 23:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
And they are not NU metal!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.146.158 ( talk) 16:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Um, no? Metal does not have contain growls to be Metal, and they wouldn't be Unblack because they don't scream...at all...Nu metal is accurate for their earlier stuff, but they're more Alternative Rock nowadays... Green Runner 0 21:27, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I just edited the article because TFK are a Christian rock band not a Christian Rock band, the latter is suggesting they are just christians in a rock band, but in truth they are a band who plays christian rock music
loveyourfaith
Loveyourfaith (
talk)
21:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Who the hell cares? It's not like any of their recent music has anything to do with christianity.
Ok so at least put Christian Rock band (rock band with all christian members) u may deny they are a Christian rock band but its up to no debate they are a Christian Rock band theres a difference between the two.
loveyourfaith Loveyourfaith ( talk) 19:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Their religion is irrelevant to the lead, it is for their genre. In genre related terms their not a 'Christian band'
Landon1980 (
talk)
22:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
But what about there song new drug which is clearly christian rock or there song puppet which if you listen you can see is christian rock and falls apart is aslo chrristian rock and breath you in is and as soon as I can find more reasons saying they are christian I will post them.
And post your reasons before you change it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.160.221 ( talk) 23:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok,whoever keeps changing the artical back must not have any good reasons to change it so if anyone knows how to block him please do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.151.200 ( talk) 21:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
"TFK is a christian band, they participate in christian events like the Creation Festival ( http://www.creationfest.com/ne/program.php) and play shows in churchs, and i have the álbum "Phenomenon", these guys are christians." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacheco Mortification ( talk • contribs) 03:41, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
"Who the hell cares? It's not like any of their recent music has anything to do with christianity." Their albums are flooded with religious overtones... Still, Wikipedia isn't the place for personal ideals on band lyrical approaches. The band considers their music to be Christian music and there's sources to back it. Remember, just because the music is labeled as such does not mean their music is "just for Christians" or contains a fireball sermons about infidels and crackheads. 74.5.111.155 ( talk) 02:27, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I've got an idea, there's been plenty of debate on almost every band's talk page concerning their genre. A general rule of thumb for ANY WP article is that there should be third-party, verifiable, reliable citations for any claims. Therefore, I suggest that any genre's that can be shown to be cited in external media (the band's claims such as in myspace/last.fm/etc themselves are considered first-person, and unfortunately cannot be used). There should be plenty of sources for any legitimate genre claims. How does this sound? Wikiwikikid ( talk) 17:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
We don't need to sorce christian metal or christian rock or any christian gernre with this band cause all people who know anything about them know they're a christian band with christian lyrics and I've heard alot of people say this artical is unreliable because they say they don't do christian music.
Do other editors wish to have this genre included? I don't have a problem with the genre I just want to see it sourced properly. I hate adding a genre just because one source says 'Christian rock' in a categories section along with alt rock (shows they don't even know the difference) then the source has a review and sure doesn't mention Christian rock. It needs a reliable source that definitively says their genre is Christian rock. Landon1980 ( talk) 15:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
"Remember that wikipedia only reports the facts as they are in reliable sources, regardless of editors' personal feelings on the matters."
Ok I agree. That being the case you need to add a category section and leave it out of the genres. I have looked all morning and there seem to be no other sources that deem the band Christian rock. Calling them 'Christian rockers' such as mtv, vh1, etc., but they then go on to say they are "Christian themed rap" As for alternative rock, no other source backs up that claim. Stop shoving policy down my throat, I am aware of all existing policies and guidelines. Landon1980 ( talk) 19:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Also, will you point me to the policy that says "if it's published it's reliable" Landon1980 ( talk) 19:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh for god's sake...here we go again. Landon, why on earth have you gone and removed those two genres -again-? I thought this had finally been settled. You claim they are questionable: why? The source -is- valid, it -does- call them those genres. You personally may not agree with it, but your personal view has no bearing on this.
Also, I seem to recall you claiming that I was "gaming" the 3RR, something I'd like to stress I've never done before. Yet here you are doing precisely that: waiting and then reverting yet again. Supply a -very good- reason for your last revert here or I'll simply take this to a mediation board. I really do say this for your own good: quit while you're ahead. Prophaniti ( talk) 23:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
You need to read over the npa policy, attacking the editor in any way is violating it. Whether it be my logic or my shoe size doesn't matter. Saying my logic is foolish is saying I am foolish. Like you said, Wikipedia is based on verifiability. We do not have to take the word of one database, but we can listen to what reliable sourcs in general are saying. You are all over wikipedia shoving musicmight down the throat of fellow editors, and edit warring on multiple articles. You have got to understand that just because one database says something doesn't mean it has to be added. Landon1980 ( talk) 13:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi all! I have accepted this case. I've briefly looked through the debate so far and just doing a bit of background research it seems, initially at least, that this band has been described as a Christian rock band in multiple locations; such as here (called "Christian music"), here (it describes a well-known "Christian rock" festival), here (Lists it as under the "Christian rock" genre), and it seems that they are recognized as "gospel music" artists, being nominated for the GMA awards here. Others describe them as simply Christian musicians; such as here. Still others seem to describe them as Christian musicians; such as here. And still other's as simply Christian; such as here. This band was up for a Juno Awards under the category ""Contemporary Christian/Gospel Album" as can be seen here.
It certainly seems that their music has a strong religious, praise or Christian aspect to it. (NB: not all sources are WP:RS compliant but it shows a strong public perception of their genre.
Comments? :-) fr33k man t - c 20:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
BTW: Before this is fully over, Prophaniti ( talk · contribs) needs to weigh in to be fair of us. fr33k man t - c 02:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Two perfectly valid sources have now been provied for christian rock, allmusic and NME. Landon1980 continues to remove the sources. Landon, why? Both are perfectly valid sources, one describes them as "christian rock" the other as "christian metal". Given metal is a subgenre of rock, this gives us two fine sources for christian rock. Either would be enough, given the lack of sources on this page. Can you give any good reason for your removal of this information before it's taken to third opinion? Prophaniti ( talk) 14:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Being able to source their religion doesn't make it infobox material. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
206.53.144.85 (
talk)
12:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Will someone show me where the consensus for Christian rock is I can't find it on this page. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
206.53.144.121 (
talk)
20:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
I want to point out that most sources refer to the band as "Christian rockers" and not a Christian rock band, like MTV has done. Being Christians does not automatically make them a Christian band. Landon1980 ( talk) 02:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Something to note: while Precious Roy is putting forward a fine argument, it’s all somewhat irrelevant: I provided a source, allmusic, for christian rock. Not “a rock band that happens to be christian”, but under the genre heading “Christian rock”. Allmusic is an accepted source (I think this might be the root of the problem here for you Landon, since you seem unaware of how much it's accepted on wikipedia), and it says, unequivocally, that they are christian rock. That’s all there is to it. When you have a source like that you don’t need consensus. Remember, reliable sources always outweigh any number of wikipedia editor opinions. So even if 100 editors were against it, christian rock is going into the genre field. Prophaniti ( talk) 15:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm not going to respond properly to an obvious sore loser, Landon. It's painfully apparent that you won't accept wiki policy where it conflict with your POV and will do all you can to try to undermine things. Just deal with it and move on. Prophaniti ( talk) 22:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
[edit conflict] I notice that Landon1980 has dropped the consensus argument but was quick to latch onto Prophaniti's "single source". What about all the other sources that Fr33kman linked to? The bottom line: There are sources that say they are Christian rock and the consensus on the talk page is to include Christian rock in the infobox. I don't see why this argument is continuing. Also, Landon1980, you really should stop trying to goad Prophaniti into getting him/herself blocked; that's really not the way that editors work together. Just because you didn't get your way doesn't mean you shouldn't act civilly to those you disagree with. Precious Roy ( talk) 22:07, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE for starters. Seriously though, I'd rather shoot myself in the foot as talk to you. By plucking one of three genres out of the bunch and making it dominant you violate our NPOV policy. Unless you can provide a reliable source that definitively says they are almost always defined as 'Christian rock' you do not have a case. As of now it is one of several, all with reliable sources. Look around wikipedia, this is done very frequently, listing the general term is very accurate, doesn't pick sides, and cuts down on edit warring. Landon1980 ( talk) 22:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
After an initial disagreement and further conversation with User:Landon1980 I agree that the lead-in sentence, rather than just being the most vague, should be the most substantiated genre. While I was under the impression that they were most commonly referred to as a Christian rock band, I've searched through some genre sources along with the ones already provided, and most sources I've found definitely say "rock." If anyone seeks to change the lead-in genre to Christian rock, please provide evidence to substantiate this claim (a substantial number of acceptable sources) that they are primarily Christian rock rather than rock. If you have an opinion or know of policy contrary to this, please feel free to share it so that we can take this into consideration, and happy editting! Wikiwikikid ( talk) 16:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Nu-metal? Still? Isn't Nu-metal along the lines of Korn, specifically their older material? 74.5.110.177 ( talk) 14:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I was just wondering, since there is already a Welcome to the Masquerade page, why can't we add info about it if it has already been confirmed. I tried to, but Landon1980 undid it saying, "wait until it is released." I just want to know why you're waiting. Charlitus54 ( talk) 07:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah... I see... now I understand. Well, I found on toothandnail.com that the release is September 8, and I'm guessing that's a reliable source. I'm about to add it. thanks for the help, Charlitus54 ( talk) 02:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Should a separate page be made for the single "Fire it up" as it has charted, and is featured in so many games, ads and trailers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116Rebel ( talk • contribs) 09:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Trevor McNevan also has another side project as a rapper/artist in Manafest. Needs to be included somewhere see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_ew-jMy794
Look, everyone stop fighting. This text is inappropriate on the grounds that it's total original research. Who's to say that that song is the band's "most commercial success"? Adding a Wikipedia article as a source for that doesn't work on two fronts: one, it's a link to a Rock Band article and has nothing to do with commercial success per se, and two, Wiki isn't a reliable source. So stop adding this text - the anon IP has already passed 3RR twice. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 19:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Stepping back. This is the body of the text at the last point. The only edits I've made is linking internally to the wikipedia article and making it a sup instead of a ref, and placing citation requests in the questionable sections to help clarify matters for the anonymous editor.
The bands most commercial success citation needed to date came with the release of their single Fire It Up, which has been used in many movies citation needed, as well as being included as a downloadable track for Rock Band 2. 1
I hope this clears up the issue without having it digress further into an edit war. -- Walter Görlitz ( talk) 20:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
This article has major sourcing issues. The band passes the notability bar with the albums charting, so that is not an issue, but an incredible amount of this informatino is effectively OR. of the 39 "refs", 3 of them are actual RS in depth fact sources. The vast, overwhelming, majority are dead, self-published,PR, twitter/facebook/blog, or database dumps. This really needs to be cleaned up and things sourced correctly. I am tagging the article accordingly. Gaijin42 ( talk) 20:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Here is a breakdown of the sources currently used :