Talk:Children of Bodom/Archive 1

Where are the "death grunts" in Children of Bodom?
As was talked about on the death grunt article/discussion, I am removing "death grunts" from this article and putting "extreme vocals" in place. Laiho does not fit the category of a "death growler" --Danteferno 7 August 2005 11:19 (UTC)
 * To me, Laiho's vocals resemble those of Chuck Schuldiner in late Death, only somewhat less emotional, thus he fits the early definition of death grunts. The extreme metal article doesn't really explain what the vocals sound like. What if "extreme vocals" or some other definition was kept but the inwiki pointed to death grunt? --Sn0wflake 23:35, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * A lot of DM vocalists (esp. in Scandinavia) have used vocals that resembled Schuldiner's:Peter Tägtgren, Anders Friden, Tomas Lindberg, etc. That doesn't really qualify as a death grunt. Schuldiner/Death was merely a far-back influence on the entire DM genre. The death grunt is characteristically low, while these vocals are high/raspy. Hence, death grunts would mislead. Also, because Children Of Bodom have been lumped in other musical categories (particularly symphonic black metal, for early albums) "extreme vocals" (linking to extreme metal) would be the best description. Perhaps I should expand the extreme metal article to go into further detail on this. --Danteferno 8 August 2005 6:55 (UTC)

Neo-Classical metal influence?
I love this band and I have all their cd's, and a lot of their earlier work like on Something Wild and Hatebreeder has lots of these classical bits and pieces that I hear a lot (I also listen to a lot of classical music, esp from the Baroque period.) If you are interested in music theory, and can deal with the terminology, look at the Neo-classical metal article, especially the Techniques and Sounds parts. Bodom incorporates a lot of those elements into their music, and I hear a couple of their songs end with "the almighty classical ending finale" (I forget the term, tension and resolution? listen to the songs Hatebreeder, Towards Dead End, Black Widow.)  Yeah, anyway...Thoughts? AshTM 3 July 2005 21:33 (UTC)
 * This is getting... complicated. Children of Bodom has an unique style, and on the last discussion we had on this matter we were trying to focus on the band as a whole, and put emphasis on their most recent works. Thus the description we had before your edit was born. I believe that, if you analyze the band as a whole, the only element CoB uses from neo-classical are the "scale sequence", which Alexi uses in most of his solos. Apart from that, you can only find the style on a few songs from their earlier albums, such as Red Light In My Eyes. Since the upcoming Are You Dead Yet? will see yet another stylistic change, I don't know wether these per-album elements should be added to the lead section. --Sn0wflake 3 July 2005 22:20 (UTC)

Finnish Bands?
"..sharing the same interest for Finnish heavy/death metal bands such as Stone, Entombed and Obituary.."

Entombed are swedish, Obituary are from Florida (I'm pretty sure)...

Jackliddle 22:21, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * I got that information from an interview Alexi gave, I don't have much knowledge about those bands, myself. Probably I didn't get the context quite right. It was trivial data, anyway. --Sn0wflake 03:08, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't think the logic was meant to be (Finnish) (black/death metal) (bands), but rather (Finnish black/death metal) (bands), i.e. a band that play Finnish black/death metal. They probably mixed up Finnish with Scandinavian. -- towo 14:14, 2004 Nov 26 (UTC)


 * The average reader might not exactly "get" that, so this is probably the best way. And yeah, it's possible you are right. --Sn0wflake 02:15, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * why would the "average reader" be reading up on Children of bodom? the article should be written to the readers who would get it because this topic interests them, and therefore they will be the ones reading it. --dan Sawchuk


 * Articles are written in the same context as Essays. Articles presume that the reader knows nothing about the subject, and as such, is reading the article on the presumption of learning. Thus, articles are written to be readable by all, not just by fans of the band. Leyasu 00:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Genre
Most real classifications I heard go into the direction of melodic death metal, but over with death metal, the mass seems to think that being streamline with symphonic death metal, but I can't really see Children of Bodom in Nightwish. The genre has an independent, stubby article in its own right, though.


 * Melodic death metal seems to be adequate. Changed. --Sn0wflake

Children of Bodom is far from being death metal. The only death metal elements in CoB are the harsh/shrieking vocals and the blastbeats. The instrumental is a mix of Power Metal and Speed Metal. Melodic Death Metal is best defined by bands such as Arch Enemy, Amon Amarth and The Black Dahlia Murder
 * Yeah, I know. But the fact is that there is no such thing as "power death metal", which would be what describes CoB better, so we opted out for what was the closest to that. I do agree that the keyboards make it very power metal, but you have to take into consideration the content of the lyrics which is in general darker and the vocals/rhythm guitar which are more death metal. Generally, the posture in this cases is to follow what the band says, and Alexi said in an interview that "we are sort of death metal", so I am going with that lead. --Sn0wflake 21:42, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Melodic Black Metal classification of CoB is pure rubbish. Who ultimately suggested that? --Wisdom89

That would be me. You overlook that musical composition of Death Metal, is not the same as that of Black Metal. Few moments of Death Metal influence in some riffs, in some songs, doesnt make a band Death Metal. Also, Alexi himself has mentioned how the band composes their song. Thus, the description given so far is accurate. No, they are not part of the Black Metal image, or share in its views, but their musical composition holds a great part of Melodic Black Metal. Leyasu 10:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

why not create a new genre to describe children of bodom, as it is difficult to accurately classify them into an existing one. i recommend synthesizer metal. this describes the use of keyboards while still describing the general "metal" image of the band. dan sawchuk


 * Genres are not created on your whims because you do not know musical propertys of genres as well as others do. Children of Bodom started as a band combining heavy Black Metal and heavy Power Metal influence. Over time they progressed into combing Death Metal and Power Metal influence. On their latest album they even start to move into Nu Metal influence. The band, much like Labores Somnium, Penumbra and Naamah, have several influences from different genres. As such, you do not 'create a new genre' as things do not work that way, you simply list the key proponents of their music, and the fact they combine them. Leyasu 01:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Children of Bodom is completely and utterly devoid of any discernible Black Metal elements. Referring to them as such is a gross misrepresentation of the genre.


 * They have several black metal elements in their music, not in their image. Their musical genre is a combination of these styles musically, image is akin to a genre, it is not a prequisite of it. Leyasu 23:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

The "melodic black metal" thing is ridiculous. Bodom's music bears almost no resemblance to black metal of any form. Where is the incessant tremolo picking? Where are the "atmospheric" interludes? Where are the walls of synth choirs? I think that the melodeath/power hybrid is the best description of the band's style. 220.239.77.250 11:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Provide a source to say different to what the band has said, and then we will change it. Leyasu 15:40, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I know that, on occasion, members of the band have referred to their music as black metal. Really, that's irrelevant. If you compare Bodom, and, say, Dissection, a real melodic black metal band, you will find that they do not share enough to justify a tag of "melodic black metal" for CoB. Also, it appears that you are the only one here in favour of such a classification. That doesn't make you wrong, but think about it. 220.239.77.250 22:53, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The band plays a hybrid, and is not directly any of the genres listed. As a hybrid, they combine features of all the genres, and as such, all the genres are listed. The Gathering is another example of this.


 * Also, please stop changing large portions of the text to suit your own view of the band. The point of NPOV is to keep the text neutral, writing things such as 'virtuosic' is not NPOV. If you wish to explain that the bands speed is faster than bands nromally found in the Death Metal and Black Metal genres due to their Power Metal influence, please explain this without the personal thoughts of yourself in the article. Leyasu 23:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that's the point though. No one is disputing that the band assimilates different elements from more than a single genre of music. However, Black Metal (or melodic Black Metal) do not describe Children of Bodom. While imagery is vitally important for determining black metal "status" (which CoB obviously do not share with epitomizing bands), they do not meet the criteria musically or philosophically either. Wisdom89 01:29, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Musically they do, but this is mostly restricted to earlier albums, where the Death Metal influences where less prominent. Leyasu 01:34, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

The only Bodom song I have heard which even remotely resembles black metal is In the Shadows. I'm aware that you aren't trying to define the band as only "melodic black metal" but it's not even a part of CoB's music.

Also, you claim that I inserted things like "heroism" into the article. This claim is an outright lie. I did not write anything like that. If it's there now it's because it was there before. I'll admit that I did write "virtuosic", but in order to describe anything a measure of subjectivity is required. If you have an adjective that you think would better describe the solo sections, then I'd like to see it. 220.239.77.250 02:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Put simply, the band uses Melodic Black Metal in their music, wether you like that fact or not, deal with it. Starting a revert war will solve nothing, and until you provide sources for your claims, the article shall remain as it was before you changed it. Leyasu 02:34, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Being specific name the Black Metal characteristics that CoB display. Also, provide the exact moments in the songs that they appear. Wisdom89 02:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC) - Also make sure that they are exclusive to Black Metal.


 * If the band says they use Black Metal in their composition, then that is enough. They are not exclusivly a Black Metal band, as they are not Exclusivly a Power Metal or Death Metal band. Leyasu 03:27, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Strange, isn't it, how when I try to describe the band's style, it's "NPOV", but when you do so, it's "fact". It is YOUR opinion. Get over it. It is not an opinion which is shared by anyone else on this page; in fact, quite the contrary:

"The Melodic Black Metal classification of CoB is pure rubbish. Who ultimately suggested that?" -- Wisdom89

"Children of Bodom is completely and utterly devoid of any discernible Black Metal elements. Referring to them as such is a gross misrepresentation of the genre." -- Anonymous user (Not me. Check edit history if you don't believe me.)

Hell, even the vandal thinks you're wrong.

You say that I have no sources. But where are yours?

http://metal-archives.com/band.php?id=22

http://www.metalstorm.ee/bands/view_band.php?band_id=children_of_bodom

None of the above mention black metal at all.

Does the music of Children of Bodom have any of the characteristics I mentioned before, which are notable characteristics of black metal? You should actually try to improve the article rather than letting it stagnate by continually reverting it. 220.239.77.250 03:31, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, I think you should take a look at this section.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes#Avoidance

In particular, note the bold text. 220.239.77.250 03:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * *
 * *
 * *


 * There is three. Also note the second site returned in a search result explicity calls them a black metal band . Leyasu 04:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. But we could go on citing websites forever. You never answered Wisdom's question above. That is the real point. Also, if you like, we could have a vote - your preferred version or mine. The current version could be whichever has the most votes at the time. I'm not sure how to set it up, but I think it's a good idea. Also, did you read the Wikipedia link I posted above? Don't just revert, improve the new page. For now, though, you should try to justify your argument by answering Wisdom's question. 220.239.77.250 04:34, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Firstly i dont need to justify anything, other than providing sources. Secondly, there needs to be no vote, when this issue has been raised before, both on this page, and on the talk page for melodic death metal.


 * The page is fine as it is. Your version is not NPOV when it constantly refers to things as facts and emmits other views from the article.


 * I already know the link above, but that does not mean i will simply ignore vandalism.


 * Sources have been provided, and as such i need not argue more. The article shall remain as it is, until someone chooses to expand it in a NPOV way. Leyasu 04:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Again, I will restate my question/request. Please enlighten us as to the many Black Metal elements that indisputably justify the current genre description for Children of Bodom. Wisdom89 05:08, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Quit stalling and impeding the progress of this article by constantly reverting all changes back to original edits you have made. The overall consensus has changed. No one but yourself feels CoB should be referred to as black metal. All you're managing to do is stagnate the page. Wisdom89 17:20, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Firstly, an editorial consensus was already reached. Second, as long as sources were provided, what is there stays in the article, wether you agree with it personally or not. That is NPOV. If you wish to expand the history, trivia, critiscim and so forth, then do it, but do so without removing large pieces of the page and changing them to suit your POV of the band. Trying to force ur POV onto the page, disregarging sources and NPOV policy is counted as Vandalism, and i will revert it. Leyasu 17:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Stop dodging the question.

Anyway, what editorial consensus? Show us. Also, what's the point of providing sources when the sources are just opinions as well? Genre is subjective, or POV as you call it. By continually reverting to the melodic black thing, you are trying to force YOUR POV on the page! Also, you have ignored repeated requests to leave the rest of the article alone. You have provided no justification for these changes. If you're going to try and incite an edit war then keep it to the first paragraph please, unless you have justifications for your changes to the rest of the article. Kindly adhere to Wikipedia policy and stop reverting to an obviously outdated version of the page. 220.239.77.250 22:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, if you're going to revert again, please specify, with exact quotes, the POV information in the article. Show us what we're allegedly doing wrong. Remember that genre is subjective and in that instance you are the one going against the consensus (and I don't mean this fictional consensus that you always refer to). 220.239.77.250 22:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. A consensus is what the majority feels is proper, and it's a dyanmic thing. Currently, it appears as though the "majority" wishes to emend the genre description to make it less confusing and more accurate. You're only being difficult because the black metal reference was espoused by yourself. Also, citing websites is useless since there are tons of misinformed people all over the net. However, please feel free to actually read the biography of the band from your second source. You might find it interesting. There needs to be some degree of objectivity if you're going to label a band and pigeon hole them in a genre, and the facts are that CoB are not a black metal band based on several lacking elements. You already conceded that their image does not fit the tag, and the same goes for philosphically (not vociferously anti-christian, not interested in the occult etc..etc..). That leaves their music, and there isn't anything to support the tag there. Also, forgive me for saying this, but it doesn't really mean jack how the band refers to themselves. I can pick up a guitar, play folk music and then go on the road and proclaim that I'm a jazz artist. That's a garbage argument. Wisdom89 23:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, if you want to get technical about things and give a fair description of the band - one would need to include many of the other styles that are currently excluded in the text; speed metal, neoclassical elements, and thrash are all part of CoB sound. The only label that doesn't fit is your Black Metal nonsense. Wisdom89 23:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I suggest both of you read Wp:Cite and WP:NPOV. Both of these are core policys that you are both ignoring, and will over ride all other policys in terms of importance. Again, i have given sources as to the genre argument, and if the rest of this talk page is read, you will see the various arguments on the band's genre.


 * When expanding the article, it is important to keep to neutral reading. I am not the best person to explain this, but here goes:


 * Statement A: The Duck is a marvelous bird that lives in water and is a master predator of fish, and is beautifull in the way it looks.


 * Statement B: The Duck is a horrendous bird that lives in smelly park pondsm cant catch fish for shit, and is fucking ugly


 * Both of these statements elude a clear POV in their thoughts of The Duck. One praises, and the other degrades. As editors on Wikipedia, a core part of editing is to keep to NPOV. This means representing both views above equally and fairly, while not giving bias to either statement, wether you agree with either or not. An example of this is:


 * The Duck is a form of bird that is commonly found inhabiting areas of water, such as rivers and ponds. The Duck is a predator of fish, and its predatorial abilitys vary depending on its habit. Some see the duck as a highly elegant bird, but others disagree with this assertion, claiming the duck is an ugly bird.


 * This gives a fair represnetation of the facts about The Duck, and represents both views equally.


 * I hope the above example helps in your future edits on Wikipedia. Leyasu 23:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Please point out which parts of the newer version are not NPOV.

Additionally, you should know that citations concern facts. A genre classification for a musical ensemble is not fact. It is opinionated. I could say that I think Bodom is a jazz band, not offer any justification for my classification, and then edit war with people who think Bodom is metal. You have to accept that a genre classification cannot be proven right or wrong. However, if I were to say that Children of Bodom formed in 1985, you would easily be able to cite sources to the contrary and establish my assertion as false. You cannot do so with genre.

I will consider your classification if you state the characteristics of melodic black metal that the band displays and give a few examples (in terms of songs and times in songs at which these characteristics appear). 220.239.77.250 01:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It does not matter what you consider, it matters what the sources say. I have provided sources that say something, so what they say shall stay in the article. Emmiting sourced information from the article is vandalism, continue this behaviour and i shall be forced to inform an admin. Leyasu 01:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Stop evading the question. Sources that show other people referring to Bodom as "Black Metal" does not make a tenable argument. In order to be as objective as possible in this situation one must be able to pinpoint identifiable traits and characterists of the band in question. Please list the specifics black metal elements of CoB. I trust you'll find such a task excruciatingly difficult. Wisdom89 02:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ive already learnt from other articles, arguing the same argument has you have made, that doing so is pointless. Wikipedia runs on sources. I have provided them, thus the information in the article stays as it is. End of. If you wish to complain about a policy, do so to the proper Wikipedia authority. Leyasu 02:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

In that case, please include the other genres and styles that CoB touch upon. There are stockpiles of sources which cite their neoclassical and thrash elements. However, I seem to recall those styles being deleted (by you) on more than one ocassion. Wisdom89 02:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * If this is the case, then we need to draw up a Genre Controversy paragraph similar to the one on the Cradle of Filth article. Leyasu 02:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Damn, do you even read the stuff we post here? Please point out which parts of the newer version are not NPOV. Also, why won't you answer Wisdom's question? Do you not have an answer? Can you not point out any parts of any Bodom songs which resemble black metal? 220.239.77.250 04:10, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Wether i can or can't is not a factor in the article. Wikipedia's Wp:Cite policy overules your thoughts on the bad, and WP:NPOV determines the action taken. Ignorance of these policys further will result in reverts for vandalism and the matter being brought to the notice of an Administrator, which may result in several precautionary measures against yourself. Please take this warning, understand your POV is represented, and removing sourced information is vandalism. Leyasu 04:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

'''Please point out which parts of the newer version are not NPOV. Then, I will correct them.''' 220.239.77.250 04:39, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * NPOV has already been explained, and your reverting out sourced information is vandalism. You have been warned against this and now an admin will be informed of this. Leyasu 04:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I've tried to prevent future conflict as mentioned in the edit summary. The genre controversy part ensures that all viewpoints on genre are represented. We should try to compromise here, and that's what I'm doing. Remember:

"Be respectful to others and their points of view. This means primarily: Do not simply revert changes in a dispute. When someone makes an edit you consider biased or inaccurate, improve the edit, rather than reverting it."

(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution#Avoidance) 220.239.77.250 00:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization
I assume the capitalization in this is bad.


 * Well, not anymore. ;) --Sn0wflake 05:48, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Fine work
Nice job on the article. Everyone should listen to Tokyo Warhearts. Man that was amazing. -- Sy / (talk) 03:20, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks loads. I believe in working hard for great causes. Heavy metal to the bone. ;) --Sn0wflake 21:58, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Comment moved from article
I moved the following comment by User:203.23.152.6 here. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:48, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Who did 'The Trooper' cover song then ????? - Im positive that Bodom played it!
 * I'm somewhat sure that that cover was by Norther. --Sn0wflake 19:12, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Actually it was Sentenced, a now retired finnish metal band -LL

Alexi himself told in an interview that they never covered "The Trooper". I too belive it was Sentenced.

Sentenced indeed did a cover of The Trooper. It was released on The Trooper EP; many other bands did as well tho, including Vital Remains, Lord Belial. Spearhead 21:42, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

i think Children Of Bodom should cover the song. they often get the credit, they might as well do the work. with all of the mystery surrounding the song's artist, it would likely be a hit. dan sawchuk


 * This is a Encyclopedia, not a Soapbox, if you wish to give your opinions on a band or give them suggestions, please so so at their website. Leyasu 01:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh pipe down. This is a discussion forum.