Talk:Anthrax (American band)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Rock band

just added that 'caught in a mosh' was downloadable content for rockband --91.108.85.136 (talk) 07:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

sorry I must be tripping or something that never happened I removed --91.108.85.136 (talk) 07:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)it

Comments

I understand the aversion to numerous disambiguation pages, but I think this instance fairly screams for one. Am I wrong?I think it should be Anthrax (American band) -- ZoeYeah, but it...it is now -- Michael----:I agree about the naming, so I've moved it. I'd make a disambiguation page, but I don't have time to fix all the links right now. If Anthrax isn't going to be a disambiguation page, then Anthrax disease should be moved there, and a disambiguation block put in place. Anthrax just quietly redirecting to Anthrax disease, as it does now, doesn't seem like very good thing to me. --Camembert----Dan Spitz was never part of the original Among the Living lineup. He joined the band during the Sound of White Noise album. HawaiiArmoYou have a brain tumour, Dan Spitz left after that album, hes been with the band since Fistful of Metal.-----Most thrash metal bands seem to have a picture of band on their page; can we get one for anthrax?Anouymous 11:35, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Nope - Dan Spitz was around long, long before White Noise. John Bush was the only new addition for that album.-----The orgin of the band name should be revised, as per Danny Lilkerhttp://billymilano.com/news/Lilker_interview/let_the_truth_be_heard_.htmI LOVE ANTHRAX I HAVE STOMP 442 N, AMONG THE LIVING-PENIKIFUNESKIN-----

Discography

To tidy the page and in line with guidelines, I'm moving some discographies to pages of their own on Jan 1 unless anyone has an objection. I've already earmarked Iron Maiden (band) and Megadeth and I'd like to do the same for Anthrax. It will make the main article shorter and tidier. Obviously, a link to the new discog. article will be included. IainP (talk) 16:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Done. New page could do with some more wiki-tablification(!) as currently only albums and singles are in table format. IainP (talk) 20:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

on the page, there's no mention of the album they did with UTFO called lethal- why is that i like state of euphoria,fistful of metal and spreading the disease waaaay better-penikifuneskin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.152.222.111 (talk) 14:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

"Surfer"???

This may just be pickiness on my part but the members of Anthrax didn't wear brightly colored "surfer" clothes until the album State Of Euphoria and even then it was only for the one album, posibly the following tour. But in every picture of the band that I have from 1990 and after they were not dressed this way. If anyone has proof other wise please share it. By the way I am probably not going to bother correcting this in the artical, because as I see it is only a minor detail and it helps to prove the point in the artical that they were different from the other thrash bands at the time. But if someone would like to correct it on their own,that would be good.--Anthraxrulz 08:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Buy the oidivnikufesin (NFV) video which was a live performance off the among the living tour. You'll see the wacky bermuda shorts etc there. Yes they did wear them prior to State of Euphoria duh its truh brah;-volcom rusty —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.152.222.111 (talk) 14:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

John Bush? Is he a member of Anthrax or not?

John Bush has been the voice of Anthrax for nearly 13 years and I am confused. Is John Bush a member of Anthrax or not? If John Bush has indeed left Anthrax, then it's a sad loss for Anthrax. This my POV but I believe that SOUND OF WHITE NOISE is their best album. Joey Belladonna left Anthrax and when he left, the band improved 100%. I didn't like their Persistence of Time album and the song, GOT THE TIME was horrible.

Well, if John Bush has indeed left Anthrax, then it's Anthrax's loss.

-It has been announced that the new Anthrax vocalist will be announced at the end of June. As to whether or not it's John Bush, he'd previously stated that he could not do it.

Proposal Big Four Wikiproject

I have just created the Megadeth Wikiproject. But I think that the scope is too narrow (just Megadeth) and I think that the Metal Genere Wikiproject is too large of a scope to handle everything. I propose that we make a Wikiprject Big Four, or something to that effect to cover the Big Four American Metal bands, Metallica, Megadeth, Slayer, and Anthrax. I'm eger to hear any opinons. Adumbvoget 08:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd go for just a thrash metal project DragonDance 19:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

New live album?

Doesn't seem to be any mention of it here. [1] Adamravenscroft 19:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Current members

I removed the bit about Frank Bello not touring or recording with the band following the reunion tour since the "recent article" cited was from 2004 when he first left the group. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 167.127.24.25 (talk) 18:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

Former Maiden vocalist Paul Di'Anno to join Anthrax?

I've heard some rumors and seen various petitions for Di'Anno to join the band, and as a fan of Maiden, Di'Anno did good starting Maiden off, and if he joined Anthrax, the band would appeal to me greatly, don't get me wrong, Anthrax always has been great, but they'll be even better if they got Di'Anno. So will Anthrax be getting him as their new vocalist, or is this merely a pipedream straight out of the rumor mill?--4.154.247.41 05:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

-This was a fan request, but it never went anywhere. Your answer is no.

We've Come For You All on Nuclear Blast?

That's funny, everywhere else I've checked in the US, WCFYA is on Sanctuary. This needs to be fixed.

No, you´re wrong. Nuclear Blast released WCFYA in Europe. --Hullu poro 19:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Corey Taylor

I was on his page, and in the trivia section it said that he is considering joining Anthrax on vocals? I don't think that that's correct, because he and the other members of Slipknot are currently writing material for a 4th album. Care to clarify?Dark Executioner 23:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)Dark Executioner

Well, I'd like to say that Trivia sections are discouraged by Wikipedia's guidelines, enough said.Jonah Ray Cobbs 20:53, 27 December 2009 (UTC)JRC3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by JRC3 (talk • contribs)

Dan Spitz

The article still seems to "confirm" that Dan Spitz is a member of Anthrax again since 2005. This is disputed by the article itself by saying that currently there are only three members of the band. To clarify: The infobox says three, while current members says four. Maybe we could get a reliable source that denies or confirms Spitz's involvement? -64.194.36.55 11:16, 9 July 2007 (UTC) (Motleh logged out)

Neil Turbin

Hello. Based on a series of reversions done at Neil Turbin, an editor apparently feels that Turbin was the orignal vocalist of Anthrax. I have no knowledge at all of this subject, other than what i have gleaned in trying to clean up the article, so i cannot judge; i have noticed that here and at List of Anthrax band members he clearly is not listed as the original. Is there, however, some way that i am misunderstanding, or some way that he can be considered the original, so the other editor's point can be understood? Thanks for any help or suggestions anyone here can offer. (I'll watchlist this page, so if you answer here that'd be great.) Cheers, Lindsay 14:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Bello fired?

Not sure how reliable a source this is, but word is that Bello was just recently fired from the band and Joey Vera brought in to replace him. Here's the source[2]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Umbralcorax (talk • contribs) 02:27, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Bad article

No offense but this article is extremely poorly written. I think it should be marked as such and needs to be taken over by someone. Surely Anthrax is worthy of a decent Wikipedia article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.188.169 (talk) 21:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm goin to re-write the article as i did with the Waking Up the Neighbours and Reckless (album) pages. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 19:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Discography Chains

I've noticed that the EPs have one discography chain, while the LPs have another - but that this isn't even strictly adhered to! I suggest that it be fixed so that the EPs and LPs are all connected. (I'm talking about the previous/next album stuff in the box on the upper right). Any objections? Luminifer (talk) 16:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

There should be any objections because that is the right way to do it. See: WP:ALBUM for specific rules for album article formats. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:38, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I did a bunch.. probably didn't get them all. Luminifer (talk) 18:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
You did the opposite of what your supposed to do. Read WP:ALBUM Album progressions do not include EPs, compilations or live albums. Each album type gets its own progression. Sorry if you got confused. I thought you were going to make corrections to the progress strings that were wrong. They have been reverted back to the way they were supposed to be. The Real Libs-speak politely 21:24, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Actually, it says "Only studio albums, usually excluding live albums, compilations, singles and EPs should be included in the chronology." So by that token, the EPs should be removed entirely? Luminifer (talk) 04:20, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so we're back to this discussion. I think the text of WP:ALBUM has changed, as I can't find the text I quoted above. Now, the consensus seems to be that we should address this on a case-by-case basis. Anthrax's EPs are functionally the same as LPs - they are essentially mini-albums. So, they should be listed in the same chronology. Is there any reason not to? Luminifer (talk) 02:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

EPs are not albums and should not be included in any artist's album chronology. Studio albums, Live albums, Compilations, Covers and EPs should always be separate from one another. Wether B (talk) 10:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
But, in Anthrax's case, the EPs really are just studio albums - possibly with the exception of I'm the Man. Luminifer (talk) 05:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to have to interpret the lack of response here as implicit consensus and make the changes, unless someone has a reason not to. Luminifer (talk) 23:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

There is no response because it is a dead issue. The agreement for the album chronology is to leave it as is with EPs having their own thread. Wether B (talk) 00:20, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

You provide no reason for doing this, while I provide the reason that (a) the policy is actually vague, and the discussion on WP:ALBUM suggests it should be handled on a case by case basis, and (b) the EPs are not extended singles, but mini-albums, and thus make sense to be included in an album chronology. I already suggested this one and no one has presented a counter-argument. Luminifer (talk) 04:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Can you show how the album project guideline is vague. As I read through it I would agree that each different release type should be kept separate including ep's. Peter Fleet (talk) 10:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
The text now says: This group of fields establishes a chain connecting articles about an artist's albums. In a studio album article, the chain (for most artists) should include only other studio albums, excluding live albums and compilations; these other types can also have their own separate chains. Alternately, for some artists it may be more appropriate to include all album types in one chain, but care must be taken to maintain the integrity of chains, so that when album "A" points to "B" as the next album, "B" points back to "A" as the last (previous) album.. It does not mention EPs explicitly at all. In Anthrax's case, their EPs are studio albums (note that it does not say LP, it says 'album', meaning a collection of songs.. as opposed to a 'single', which their EPs are not).Luminifer (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't say anything about soundtracks either... but, like EPs, its a given that they are in a loop unto themselves. How are Anthrax EP's not EPs again? Who considers them albums? PEnikufesin. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Saying "its a given" does not really stand as a reason to not list them in the chronology. The point of the chronology of studio albums, as I understand it, is to present all albums of original songs, in order, (for various reasons, such as to illustrate the band's development). Singles are left out of this list because typically they have the same songs as the albums. Anthrax's EPs are not extended-play singles, but are actually short albums (with the possible except of I'm The Man, which could be seen as an extended play single). Re: Soundtracks, if a band records the entire soundtrack (if they did not, it's implicitly listed under compilations), I think there's a very good precedent for including it (like Queen's Flash Gordon album, which is included, but then, so is their Greatest Hits, so maybe that's not a good example). Luminifer (talk) 17:02, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
That's just an example of the Queen WikiProject f**king up their formats... or someone trolling the articles. (the Alice in Chains albums have an IP troll haunting their chronology all the time). The Real Libs-speak politely 18:18, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
An example of the opinions on the talk page when I asked: As I thought more about this, I think the case-by-case basis for bands makes sense here and EPs with more than 4 songs can be seen as part of the discog as a semi-LP and single-EPs with 2 or 3 songs can't. I also agree with everthing Illazilla said. Though this comes to another question. If a band's EPs are not seen as important as their studio albums (or known) should the EPs then have their own chronology? Maybe a case-by-case basis can be used for live albums as well. So as for the source of the problem, in Anthrax's case, can their EPs be listed with the studio albums? I'm also thinking their live albums can be added as well because they seem important to their discog and not just another live album. Luminifer (talk) 17:04, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

That still makes no sense... Anthrax Live albums are just that... live albums.... their EPs are EPs and the compys are compys. They are even detain in the band's navbox as such.... and their album boxes are coded correctly to clearly show what they are. The Real Libs-speak politely 18:18, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

The policy (and all discussion on the talk page) says EPs and LPs can both be listed as 'albums' if the EPs are not extended-play singles, but are short albums, which Anthrax' largely are. Since the WP:ALBUM policy no longer specifically says EPs (most likely due to a discussion like this elsewhere), it doesn't make sense. Tell me this: How is it meaningful and useful not to include 'Armed And Dangerous' in the album chronology? It was the first release with Belladonna, it had a whole not of new material, and was clearly not a single. Luminifer (talk) 18:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I think the crux of the matter is that "EP" is too ambiguous a term - it can refer to both maxi-singles and mini-albums - and that is why the langauge about EP was removed from WP:ALBUM, and why it is left ambiguous and should be handled on a case-by-case basis. So I ask again, is there any reason not to see Armed and Dangerous as a mini-album? or PENIKUFESIN? Luminifer (talk) 02:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
I would really appreciate it if someone would respond to my questions. Luminifer (talk) 19:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
(another disctinction between the two kinds of EPs is that one tends to go out of print, while the other doesn't.) Luminifer (talk) 19:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

What are you attempting to distinguish them as? They are EP's. The proper way to put them in order in the Anthrax album boxes is to have them separate from the proper studio albums. Fair Deal (talk) 01:22, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

But even your wording there is confusing. They are "proper studio albums". They are just shorter albums. If you had said LPs, it would be a different story, but you actually said 'albums'. They are albums by any definition of the word (as opposed to singles). Nothing in WP:ALBUM suggests that EPs should always be separate from LPs, and in fact the discussion I started on the talk page suggests that (a) it should be done on a case by case basis, and (b) Anthrax's EPs sound like likely candidates to be included with the LPs (see the quote I copied above). Luminifer (talk) 15:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Disagreed. The bands eps should be separate from their lps. Wether B (talk) 02:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I would find it really helpful if the people who disagreed would refute my reasoning instead of simply disagreeing. Luminifer (talk) 03:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Reading through I can't seem to see what there is to refute? Anthrax EPs are not albums. They are not listed by the label as albums. They are EPs. A&D was originally pressed as a maxi-single. I'm the Man only has 6 tracks, 3 of which are just versions of the title track. Typical EPs. Not sure where your misunderstanding of what an EP is? Perhaps a re-read of the articles related to what those different release type are would help you. EPs and albums should be kept separate from each other. GripTheHusk (talk) 03:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

How is it helpful to keep them separate? I'm the Man is arguably a maxi-single, but Armed and Dangerous and PENIKUFESIN are mini-albums. Album and EP are not mutually exclusive terms; album and single are the mutually exclusive terms, and none of these (except arguably I'm the Man) are singles. Thus, in accordance with what is actually stated on WP:ALBUM, which says that EPs should be listed either with singles or albums based on the individual content, the EPs should be listed in the main chain. (See the discussion on WP:ALBUM talk for details). Luminifer (talk) 03:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I see that no one really wants to discuss this, they just want to state an opinion and leave the discussion? Is that the case? Luminifer (talk) 06:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't see anything more to discuss. THe consensus is that EPs are a separate chain. GripTheHusk (talk) 10:40, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Not in accordance with Wikipedia:Consensus. Everything about wikipedia states that it is NOT a democracy - a real discussion needs to be had. Luminifer (talk) 14:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

You are the lone person in the discussion with an opinion opposite to all the other editors involved. Consensus is reached and the discussion long dead. Wether B (talk) 22:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

These releases in question are clearly EPs and not albums. Why is there any confusion over this? They should be tagged as EPs and listed separate from Anthrax's full length studio albums. Aussie Ausborn (talk) 10:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
(a) your terminology is confused: an "album" is an album of songs. Both LPs and EPs are albums in this case. (b) the WP:ALBUM rules does not state that they should be listed separately - it used to, but it does not state this any longer. we should update this page to keep in line with it. Luminifer (talk) 19:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

John Bush (musician) page up for deletion

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Bush (musician) comments are appreciated. J04n(talk page) 13:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

About Bush

Just wanted to note that if you clicked on John Bush's page in the 'Members' fragment of the info box it would redirect to a disambiguation page for others named John Bush with articles. I took care of it, unless there's any reason not to (which I don't see any reason to).JRC3 •talk• —Preceding undated comment added 01:00, 14 January 2010 (UTC).

Genres in the infobox

Just to get this started, and clarify my revert here. User:MetalBrasil made these changes without discussing them first. Sourcing in the infobox is generally not accepted, and should be provided within the article, perhaps under a Musical style heading. As for the issue of what comes first, to quote another editor "General practice is actually to list overarching genres first, followed by subgenres." Heavy metal music covers thrash metal, speed metal, both subgenres of heavy metal, while crossover thrash is a form of thrash metal. Plenty of sources out there for them so thats not really the issue here. Genres are usually disputed a lot and while Anthrax are a thrash metal band (I am assuming that is why the editor wanted that first), for consistency, a broad genre is better. HrZ (talk) 19:45, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not going to argue about the position of sources, or the order of genres, since I don't really care, these are cosmetics. You want to add a section and discuss musical genres, be my guest. But if you are going to revert properly referenced material you better bring your own sources. Allmusic's professional team says rap metal. You don't agree? Bring a source saying they are not. You might want to have a look at the sources provided in rap metal too. --Muhandes (talk) 11:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry but how does asking someone to discuss genres become I disagree with a source? I edit mainly music related articles and genres are usually disputed; "They are not emo, have you even listened to emo music?", "They are THRASH METAL not HEAVY METAL", and so on. This is why I ask for a discussion everytime (unless there is already a consensus to which I revert back to that), wither or not the editor(s) are adding a genre that I agree or disagree with. That way, we can get the ball rolling and a get consensus for this article rather than just let everyone add/remove what they want or don't like.
As for the source you provided, Allmusic is a source I use often when writing biographys and need chart info. As for the genres, the bio is more accurate than the labels listed, as the two often contradict each other. At least the bio has the text to back the genres, which makes it more verifiable than simply labelling them. The bio from the Allmusic, which we can attribute to Stephen Thomas Erlewine and not the "Allmusic professional team," states in the first line: "Nearly as much as Metallica or Megadeth, Anthrax were responsible for the emergence of speed and thrash metal." Explanation: Because they combined the "speed and fury of hardcore punk with the prominent guitars and vocals of heavy metal (pretty much the description of thrash metal), they helped create a new subgenre of heavy metal on their early albums." He goes on to say "Anthrax arguably became the leaders of speed metal" while he does say they experiment with hip-hop, but he only states they toured with Public Enemy and covered one of their songs. Wouldn't think that is enough to label them as rap metal. That is why I reverted that one source, not enough to label their music rap metal. I should also note that you did not add thrash metal despite it being mentioned in the bio and there being many sources stating they are one of the "Big Four" of thrash metal.
As for "You might want to have a look at the sources provided in rap metal too." - If there are sources there, why didn't you use them or at least provide the information for your arguement here? The one source there from Business Week only mentions one song + the afore mentioned Public Enemy cover: "The metal band Anthrax also put out a single in 1987 called "I'm the Man" that was an incredibly bad -- but really funny -- mixture of rap and metal. Anthrax would later do a collaboration in 1991 with the rap act Public Enemy to perform the song Bring the Noise." - so only two songs that are rap metal, not nearly enough to be an included genre in my opinion.
If there are sources clearly stating rap metal, then fine, I really don't have a problem with it's inclusion if there are enough sources. What band/musician articles have in their genre field will never reflect or change my own opinion. For the moment, from that one Allmusic source;, it should be "Heavy metal, thrash metal, speed metal" and if more and better sources for rap metal then it's pretty simply "Heavy metal, thrash metal, speed metal, rap metal." HrZ (talk) 13:58, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
You know what, I don't really care. I am all against everyone adding and removing genres without sources, but I did not think we go over our heads to dispute sources. For me allmusic is enough to include a genre. But if you don't agree, don't. --Muhandes (talk) 14:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I have this feeling that Anthrax is Crossover thrash too. What I mean is many articles say Antrax had much more of a punk influence than metallica or megadeth, and they sound extremely similar to hardcore. They sound too alot more like Crossover Thrash bands such as suicidal tendencies than they do to pure thrash like Vio-Lence or Dark Angel. 199.107.16.119 (talk) 19:08, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
If you don't have a reliable source saying that the band is crossover thrash then you don't have any leverage in this discussion about genres in the infobox. Binksternet (talk) 19:29, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Anthrax (American band). Andrewa (talk) 02:20, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Anthrax (American band) → Anthrax (US band) – Ambiguous disambiguation per WP:Naming conventions (music), no one types "...(band)" and Anthrax (UK band) also exists. Consistent with Poison (American band) (a German band exists), Exodus (American band) (a Polish band exists) etc. Anthrax (American band) also possible. Anthrax (American band) can continue to redirect to US band or redirect to Anthrax (disambiguation) as wished... In ictu oculi (talk) 12:36, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cover image

I think this article needs a cover image that is more representative of how the band typically appears to fans on stage. The only member shown that has been in the band for more than a few years is Scott Ian; Jon Donais has only been in since 2013, and that guy behind the kit clearly isn't Charlie Benante, but rather one of his stand ins (Jon Dette I think?). If anyone has an image with Charlie behind the kit and/or Joey Belladonna and Frank Bello included in the image, make it the new cover image if you can. Cheers. Vicious Friendly Fish (talk) 11:19, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Anthrax (American band)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Article contains good information, headers, and infobox, but does not cite sources. - cgilbert(talk|contribs) 18:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 02:14, 11 November 2013 (UTC). Substituted at 07:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anthrax_(American_band)/Archive_1&oldid=1206442203"