Talk:Children of Bodom/Archive 3

Extreme Power/speed metal
I'm wondering why nobody reverted my changing "Power" to "Extreme Power" metal in the genre box, or do we now just aggree on my logic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.32.93 (talk) 18:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

sorry for delay, it is already reverted. extreme power doesn't exists. Haxxiy (talk) 21:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Why are they power metal? Isn't it melodic death? Power metal has clean vocals while CoB's vocals are harsh but I do agree not as harsh as most other death/black metal.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.177.17 (talk) 17:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

They have power metal influences and is backed up, thats enough. Haxxiy (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Although I'm sure that I have indeed read before on this site that "Extreme Power Metal" is power metal with more harsh vocals, more the vocals used in CoB. —Preceding

What are you talking about....the most well known extreme power metal band is dragonforce, do u hear the growling...??

unsigned comment added by 71.162.37.102 (talk) 23:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Genre (death metal side)
Melodic or symphonic? Melodeath is Amon Amarth. Symphonic metal is like power metal. They are closer to power metal than amon amarth, so shouldnt they be symphonic death metal? also they do loads of sysphonic stuff like vivaldi.

http://www.metalunderground.com/interviews/details.cfm?newsid=16865

In this interview he says that he don't want CoB to be specified as a power metal-band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.45.139.31 (talk) 13:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

--Well... I've got a better idea... why we don't just put “power metal” and “melodic death metal” in the genre thing? let me explain: I've been reading lots of articles about metal bands and non-metal bands, and most of them have more than two genres. --For example; Rolling Stones have “blues”, “rock”, “reggae”, “country”, etc... however, that doesn't mean that they play one song of each, but a mixture (I mean... taking this from one and that from other to form a cool combination... --Same happens, for example with Cradle of Filth... Take for example, “symphonic metal” atmospherics, “melodic black metal” riffs and vocals, “thrash metal” drumming, and for instance “gothic metal” female singing or mood... Then we should not call Cradle of Filth a “Symphonic gothic blackened thrash metal” band ((... I also think that long genre names sound stupid and too specific)) but a (perhaps) “metal” band with some characteristics of “symphonic metal”, “melodic black metal”, “gothic metal” and etc... (and put in the genre space the three styles mentioned, wouldn't it?) --So... with Children of Bodom, we should put as an opening sentence “Children of Bodom is an extreme metal band formed by blah blah...” and in the genre space, simply put “melodic death metal”, “power metal” and maybe “neo-classical metal” too. Then maybe put a debated genre section and explain the labelling problems. --After all, we should not complicate our lives with these labelling issue. I mean - if some reader wanting to know about Children of Bodom (that never listened to it) wanted to know how people call their music style, probably after reading this genre thing that I already explained would know that the band takes a bit of one style and a bit of another one. Then, if he/she wants more details, could then search for more info in the debated genre section. --What do you think about it? I think it's the best way to solve it, not only with Children of Bodom, but regarding many other bands that mash up elements from different styles. After all, I think that music is too varied and specially metal (too much sub-genres): it would be difficult to explain the music style in just 3 words... Wouldn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by C8c8 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Folks, until you can find evidence that "symphonic death metal" is an apt genre, you cannot change it or it will be reverted. A number of people this past summer debated this extensively as you can see below with the RFC. As it stands, the genre will remain a cross between melodic death metal and power metal until valid evidence can be provided to the contrary. Obviously its good to challenge existing preconceptions if what you say is valid, but until then, please don't go changing stuff. --Supercodes (talk) 01:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

CoB are in no way symphonic anything. Symphonic metal uses instruments used in SYMPHONY ORCHESTRAS, not just keyboards like they do; it's melodic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.72.198.78 (talk) 16:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed that they're not symphonic, but I was disappointed to see they're listed as "heavy metal," which is a blanket genre. They're melodic, which is a standout from original death metal; they don't "sing," they shriek, important discrepancy between Bruce Dickinson's style and Alexi's; and the lyrics are, incredibly, often about death or symbolic of it. Makes sense to me. Power, extreme, symphonic, speed... these seem to me to have always been more adjectives describing specific songs or bands, but *not* genres. Extreme Commercialist Classical could describe Khachaturian's Sabre Dance, or Rimsky-Korsakov's Flight of the Bumblebee could be Speed Orchestral, when both are merely categorized as contemporary classical. Too specific of terms singles out certain songs. Folk Metal, Viking Metal, Pirate Metal, Egyptian Metal... these are sub-sub-sub-sub-genres... they're so specific, they lose meaning and no one can tell *what* style the band is really playing... Judas Priest heavy? Or AC/DC anthemic heavy? Or thrash with viking influences? On the other hand, "heavy metal" is too vapid and blatant a term for a band with obvious differences in singing style and guitar and drum playing. Otherwise, Dimmu Borgir is heavy metal. Wintersun is heavy metal. I'm returning it to melodic death until someone comes along and contradicts me. Keraunoscopia (talk) 22:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Bleh dee blah dee bloo... the genre descriptions in the last paragraph are perfect, I hadn't read that far through at the time. Reverted to old edit; I humbly bow out from this dangerous debate. Keraunoscopia (talk) 22:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

genre (see RFC below for more details)
how about we just call it melodic symphonic progressive neo-classical blackend extreme epic speed/thrash/death/power metal?
 * You, sir, have just solved the world's most epic genre debate. Here, have a cookie. --84.249.253.201 18:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

why no trash metal with melodic death metal influences like The Haunted —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peppermint666  (talk • contribs).

Yngwie Malmsteen comments
I fixed an edit that was apparently written in good faith but not in good writing style. It dealt with Alexi's dislike of his first album. The person editing it apparently decided to comment on how much he likes "Are You Dead Yet". It's all good now, although it still needs sources for Alexi's comments on why he made Something Wild so technical. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 163.153.222.110 (talk) 16:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

all music guide genres
i edited the genres to what Allmusic Guide has up for Children Of Bodom

Death Metal and Black Metal is about DEATH and SATAN, or else it is fucking "life metal". Euronymous said so! Hail Euronymous! --V Wiking 15:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I dare say, you bloody Yank Euronymous extensively got his delicate behind pwned by Varg Vikerness. 213.84.222.243 (talk) 01:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

A few reverts
I've just reverted four changes, and thought it'd be better to explain my reasons here than in the summary. I'm reverting the last edit by Sn0wflake because I think the comment in the 'Trivia' section is more appropriate, basically because it explains the confusion by stating the others bands that have performed the covers. It could be added to the 'Covers' section again, but I think that the more descriptive statement should be used either way. Since it is the general consensus, I decided to remove Mehicdino's edit and keep the genre as just melodeath and power in the infobox. I have decided to rewrite the offending paragraph pointed out by Leon Sword, though citation may still be needed. -Tobz1000 19:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey I'd like to point out that the paragraph you keep adding about the band's genre is not in accordance with WP:NPOV. Also, you seem to have misunderstood how "consensus" works, I'd suggest you read up on WP:CON. And please don't start another edit war. --Leon Sword 02:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I wasn't... I merely heard nothing from Mehicdino about his decision to undo my changes (until recently), and so reinstated them. It turns out the only thing he disagreed with was my removing of melodic black as a genre, but he insisting on undoing all my changes. Making changes do not need approval from others unless challenged. I left this section in the talk page from the beginning, but saw no responses here or in the history, just constant undo's. When he finally explained his actions, I took the appropriate measure of re-doing my changes but keeping meloblack in the infobox, as I've described just below his response.
 * Anyway, if you feel that paragraph still isn't NPOV, I'm happy for it to stay out; the only reason I kept kept adding it was because it was only taken out in the way I'd described above. Whilst I'm sure you have a better grasp of what is and isn't NPOV than I do, I'd like to see that section expanded some time in the future with similar information; perhaps presented in a more neutral way, however that would be done.
 * I have no intention of bypassing the system or trying to make my point of view more important than other people's; I was merely trying to improve the quality of the article and with no feedback received, that was the best I could do. -Tobz1000 02:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * True you don't need approval to edit an article, however when you see that your edits are being reverted, and by more than one editor, that is an immediate signal of disagreement. Anyways, I know you meant well and I too would like a nice section describing Children of Bodom's music so long as it is neutral and doesn't state personal opinions. --Leon Sword 03:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

They are melodic death metal/ extreme power metal
They are melodic death metal/ extreme power metal. They are not normal power metal or black metal at all.
 * Well Anonymous, thank you for your valuable opinion, backed up with careful reason. Tobz1000 01:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

To settle all of this we have to source genres. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 03:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Putting Extreme Power Metal would be better than just power metal cause they infuse Extreme metal characteristics into their power metal songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.112.177.129 (talk) 19:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

REQUEST FOR COMMENT: SUB-GENRE OF CHILDREN OF BODOM
This is an attempt to settle the debate about the sub-genre of metal that the band Children of Bodom falls under. I personally I have supplied a proposal (listed below) with evidence to support my claims, and requested input either in support or opposition. After over 3 weeks of waiting for a response, I found none with opposition, so I decided to make changes, first, eliminating melodic black metal from the list, but this was quickly undone by Leon Sword. I then made changes that changed the in place statement to the following: "...band's musical style has been described as a cross between melodic death metal, melodic black metal and power metal"; the changes I made included removing "can be" to "has been" to eliminate the definitive-ness of the answer considering agreement has not been made on the inclusion of these genres, only speculation. I also removed the "(earlier works)" following power metal because the Bodom sound, while evolving, still maintains a somewhat static sound it has always had.

This change was also reverted, this time by Mehicdino.

I am seeking some sort of consensus by those with knowledge of the band, and the metal scene. To all who read, who fall into thsi category, I implore you to add your opinion. Supercodes 17:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Statements by editors previously involved in dispute

Proposal to remove genre terms melodic death metal and melodic black metal
This was previously listed in archive 2. I am not sure why this was archived as it was fairly new and open for responses, but please respond to the below accordingly with either support or challenges, otherwise I see no reason why the genres should remain as is. Supercodes 02:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I have read through this entire debate over genre classification, and while I agree with the folks on here who claim Children of Bodom has always been power metal, I don't think this debate has been eloquently thought out enough by either side. With that said, here are my reasons, and evidence to support my reasons, why the melodic death metal and the melodic black metal genre tags should be stricken from the main article. (NOTE: I refuse to use genre classification articles on Wikipedia because there are many holes throughout those as well)

First off, a little history in metal as it pertains to the genres classified here:

Speed metal vs. thrash metal: Speed metal and thrash metal have a history of being interchangeable since the rise in popularity of speedy metal in the early 80's, however, both terms actually describe two different sub-genres. The difference between the two genres is largely based on another completely different genre of music; hardcore punk. Thrash metal started in the late 70's/early 80's with several different bands seemingly simultaneously combining the intricacies of metal with the rudimentary, quick, anti-establishment sound of hardcore punk, which is a more sped up, aggressive style of punk often using grittier vocal stylings, (i.e. Black Flag, Minor Threat, Bad Brains). Originators of the genre include Metallica, Exodus of the Bay Area scene, and Overkill (band) of the New York scene. Metallica and Exodus are considered metal bands that brought in influences of hardcore bands they enjoyed in their music (which was often heavily influenced by NWOBHM bands). Alternatively, Overkill (band) started off as a punk band known as The Lubricunts that eventually started playing punk covers sped with, with distortion added.

Alternatively, speed metal is a sub-genre that is played equally as fast as thrash, but does NOT have punk as a primary influence. Speed metal is primarily influenced by the NWOBHM bands of the late 70's, which was based on traditional rock influences. Speed metal, in its most basic definition, is simply traditional metal sped up (i.e. Agent Steel, Venom (band) early Blind Guardian and early Helloween)! The controversy surrounding these two genres is simple--many bands during the hayday of both of these genres often would orientate bits of both of these sub-genres, which made classifying a particularly difficult task. However, understanding the differences between these genres is integral to understand the origins and sounds of CoB.

Power metal: This sub-genre of metal is one that is often quite mis-understood. Many cite the flowery, epic movie soundtrack European bands as definitive acts to explain the genre, but in reality, modern power metal is very much a new thing. The origins of power metal go back to the early 80's with bands such as Helloween, Blind Guardian, Savatage, and Jag Panzer, whom all started off largely as speed metal acts that added melody and neo-classical influences epitomized by staccato guitar work. This is the fundamental origins of power metal, REGARDLESS of which region of the world you are referring to. Power metal started off as speed metal and still continues to be a primary influence to this day.

Death metal: A style of metal that evolved from thrash metal. Death metal, as meticulously researched in the book Choosing Death, came into fruitation alongside grindcore. While death metal evolved from thrash, grind evolved from hardcore with each having the simple goal of playing faster and heavier, often with violent imagery and lyrics in the early days. Death metal, capitalizing on the intense speed of thrash, further evolved the heaviness factor by downtuning the guitars, adding gutteral vocals, and creating riffs that were far more nihilstic sounding in nature, initially eliminating most forms of melody. Early purveyors of death metal include Death (band), Possessed (band)Morbid Angel and Mastery with many an influence coming from grindcore stalwarts Napalm Death and Extreme Noise Terror. Melody was eventually added to death metal in the early 90's, particularly in the Swedish scene (i.e. Dissection, At the Gates, Dark Tranquillity, Carcass (band), Sentenced) which, should be noted, were simply death metal acts that added melody on top of the harsh, gritty sound of the old school death metal sound. As time evolved, melodic death metal evolved into a post-death metal genre that many simply call "Gothenburg" because of the location many of the bands originated in (i.e. In Flames, Soilwork, Dark Tranquillity).

Black metal: I wont get into the history of black metal, but it follows a similar path of death metal, just quite a bit more serious and folk influenced (especially the second generation).

Conclusion based on the above as it pertains to CoB:

Children of Bodom, since its earliest inceptions, has revolved around staccato guitarwork, which most true melodic death metal bands do not play with. Children of Bodom has also based its soloing heavily on neo-classical guitarwork (mainly on their first few albums) with almost NO thrash or punk influences. And if the guitar riffage wasn't enough evidence, check out the melodies produced by the keyboards in almost every song of theirs...it is pure modern power metal to its very core. I challenge anyone to find a true melodic death metal band that uses power metal keys as frequently as CoB does.

Now, some may say that death metal influences have surfaced in their latest releases, but this is not even close to being true. At the very minimum, Are You Dead Yet? is still at its core a power metal album with strong influences from Machine Head-style post-thrash metal stylings and even some metalcore. However, every single album in CoB's catalog is completely and utterly based in power metal.

Some source reading:

Choosing Death - The Improbable History of Death Metal and Grindcore

Sound of the Beast: The Complete Headbanging History of Heavy Metal

Rockdetector: A-Z of Power Metal

So basically, the ONLY part of CoB music that could arguably be death metal is the gutteral vocals, which in itself is not even close enough to justify the band's inclusion as a melodic death metal band or a melodic black metal band. Therefore, in conclusion, I propose we eliminate the death metal and black metal classifications and stick purely with the power metal, unless someone can provide proper evidence that claims otherwise (and interviews by bandmembers should not count as evidence) Please articulate disagreement and support for this proposal. If no debate is ushered in, I see no reason to keep the genre classification as is.Supercodes 05:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

See I can agree with that (even though all theese names for genres are dumb) but I belive we should source them as that is what is in wiki guidlines and the most reliable source I know is this. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 01:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, here is an interesting interview with Laiho: http://www.metalunderground.com/interviews/details.cfm?newsid=16865

„To me, it’s just metal and that’s it. It’s not black metal, it’s not death metal, it’s not thrash. It’s like, what the fuck? We don’t spend too much time thinking about labels. They don’t mean shit anyways. For me, metal is metal, music is music. So I don’t really care about labels. But, you know, if somebody says we’re black metal or they say that we’re thrash metal, I’m ok with it. I don’t really care as long as they don’t call it power metal.“ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.246.168.135 (talk) 16:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

What gutteral vocals are you talking about? I've you listen to ALL of the songs on blooddunk, and the only things I'm hearing are high-pitched growl-ish things. And growling doesn't come from death metal, it comes from thrash. Let's get rid of this melodeath crap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.37.23 (talk) 19:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposal follow up
Since there has been no contention about my proposal below, I have elected to change the genre classification to "power metal with melodic death metal influences". If anyone wishes to challenge this, please read my proposal and reply. Supercodes 21:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

They aren't power metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.119.240 (talk) 02:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

They are melodic death metal/ extreme power metal
They are melodic death metal/ extreme power metal. They are not normal power metal or black metal at all.
 * Well Anonymous, thank you for your valuable opinion, backed up with careful reason. Tobz1000 01:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

To settle all of this we have to source genres. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 03:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

why no trash metal with melodic death metal influences like The Haunted —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peppermint666  (talk • contribs).

how about we just call it melodic symphonic progressive neo-classical blackend extreme epic speed/thrash/death/power metal?
 * You, sir, have just solved the world's most epic genre debate. Here, have a cookie. --84.249.253.201 18:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Comments

Please place comments here to maintain some neatness. Thanks. Supercodes 17:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

While your intentions are good Supercodes, what you are trying to do here is flawed and pointless. First off, you are really set on pushing what you think Children of Bodom's genre is and your resulting edits are crossing over into POV. You can make all the proposals you want and modify the article to say that Children of Bodom is just another power metal band, but you will notice that time and time again countless editors will come and add melodic death metal and black metal back up again. There is no point in starting another edit war in this article, it has already gone through so many and if you look into the article history and the countless genre discussions you will see that three genres keep popping back up: melodic death metal, power metal, and black metal. That appears to be the consensus of what genres Children of Bodom is. The article seems to be the most neutral by saying that Children of Bodom's genre is a cross between melodic death metal, power metal, and black metal, because that statement does not give more importance to any one genre. You Supercodes on the other hand, want it to say that Children of Bodom's genre is a power metal with melodic death metal influences, and that is POV. By the way Skeeker, metal-archives.com is not a reliable source, that website is just another open wiki that anybody can edit and it is very biased. --Leon Sword 03:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for replying Leon, and I appreciate your feedback, however, I am going to have to disagree with your point whole heartedly. Your claim is the main argument that supporters of keeping the genres as they are all seem to use, which is that any disagreement is simply point of view (POV). While this may have been the case with others arguing your stance based on a lack of empirical evidence, I have gone out of my way to write up a fairly lengthy proposal explaining, in specific detail, about why Children of Bodom belong predominantly in neither the death or black metal genres. Your only dismissal thus far is to claim I am merely taking my POV and pushing it upon others, when in reality, you are doing this worse than I am. You claim that the genres should remain as they are because time and time again people keep claiming that the band plays the three disputed genres, when in fact, no one, in the entire archived history of this debate, has shwon credible evidence OUTSIDE of Wikipedia to support their claims. I have provided three. I understand that they are in hardcopy format which I apologize for, but this is a lot more to evidence than others have claimed to have. If you wish to claim my stance is POV, then refer to my proposal and prove me wrong, as I have laid down my evidence.

Now, while I completely disagree with the reference to black and death metal, I understand your position that it is popular belief that this band is represented by these two subgenres, which is why, upon my second edit, I merely took out the reference that Children of Bodom are no longer power metal (which it currently states, plain as day in the opening paragraph), and also to change the mentioning of these subgenres from being written in an absolutist verbage, to becoming more malleable. These changes were quickly undone.

Leon, you seem to be an individual that relies on the Wiki rulebook to back up your answers, so please check if I am incorrect with this assertion, but it is my belief that editors are frowned upon when making blatant reversions of people's edits. You perhaps are frustrated with the constant turmoil over this topic, but that doesn't excuse the fact that there are many involved in this process who are being blatantly undemocratic, when in reality, the idea of Wiki is to allow freeform democratic knowledge.

I am open to suggestions on how we can come to an agreement, but currently the page is incorrect and needs adjustments.

Supercodes 04:22, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, you are unwilling to even consider that you may be wrong and that the other wiki editors may have a point. I'm not pushing any genres because I know very well that Children of Bodom take influences from more than 5 different genres (notice that I have never edited the article to mention which five genres I think Children of Bodom belongs to). Unfortunately, your proposal here is going to go nowhere, you said that it had been up for like three weeks and nobody opposed it, but that's because hardly anybody has noticed it. I myself didn't notice this proposal until you messaged me on my talk page. The Children of Bodom article gets a lot of traffic but this talk page doesn't. Wish I could work this out more but I'm real busy (I'm supposed to be on my wikibreak). --Leon Sword 02:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay I sourced all of the genres I found sources for which is the way it is supposed to be, and someone User: Mehicdino reverted it three times now so should he be blocked... again, without sources it is WP:OR so the sources should stay but if I revert again I will break the 3 revert rule, help me out and keep the sources, so the genre war can stop and be sourced. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 04:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Skeeker, metal-archives.com is not a reliable source, that website is just another open wiki that anybody can edit and it is very biased. --Leon Sword 02:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes I know so I resourced that one and it got taken off again. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 05:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Leon, no one has proved me wrong. I have supplied evidence to the contrary of what is popular belief amongst many editors, but you keep telling me it is personal opinion. It is not my fault if more people do not visit this page. If someone comes and realizes that any changes I could make are something they disagree with, they can edit it themselves and then hopefully discuss it here. I am following Wiki guidelines, and have even conceded that what you have on the page now will suffice with some moderate changes. What is wrong with that? I explained what I wanted to change, which is more than acceptable, but you wont acknowledge anything to that degree. And just so you know, I am not going to let this die. However, I am more than willing to discuss changes. Supercodes 17:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Skeeker I hadn't noticed the re-sourced edits you made (the article is not on my watchlist) and they should have not been reverted, however you probably shouldn't have removed black metal either, that's probably why Mehicdino kept reverting you. Supercodes what you want changed (removed to be exact) is not acceptable, otherwise we wouldn't be discussing it here and people wouldn't be reverting each other. I think the best solution right now is Skeeker's proposal of citing reliable sources for all the genres, if WP:CON and WP:NPOV are not going to convince you Supercodes to let this argument die hopefully WP:V and WP:NOR will. --Leon Sword 02:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I am willing to give Skeeker's sources a try, absolutely. I think you are under the assumption still that I want to remove black and death metal, which I conceded is not something that needs to be done if the language is changed, OR if valid resources can be found to prove that all the genres currently displayed are valid. Otherwise, I will be more than happy to hunt down direct weblinks for you if you are not satisfied with the books I presented. Supercodes 06:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for backing me Supercodes, we HAVE to source these it is the proper way to do things. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 07:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Then I guess it's settled, no genres will be mentioned in the article unless they are cited. If someone reverts the cited changes without discussing their reasons here, make sure they get their warning and if they continue to revert they will be blocked. --Leon Sword 18:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Skeeker, what edits have you done? Supercodes 21:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I sourced genres, so we can get rid of the genre debate section now. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 05:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

No offense Skeeker, I know you are well intentioned, but it really doesn't fix the way the main phrase is written. Currently, it is written as if power metal is past tense, and this is a personal inclusion by an editor without any justification. If we can make it so the genres are shared equally, then I guess I can settle with that instead of debating this. Since you provided source material for each genre choice, and since the inclusion of your source for power metal reflects a review of Are you Dead Yet?, I am going to make power metal current since this album falls under their latter work. Supercodes 06:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

If you want you can put (early) by some of the genres if you please, but I just see them the same throughout their career, I have their catolage (sorry for spelling), and of cource they have changed, but I still see them as just one genre, which would probably be Melodic death metal, or my favorite JUST Heavy metal. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 06:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Skeeker, I noticed that the link you provided as a source for power metal was a review, which basically only stated that power metal was non-existent on Are You Dead Yet? I don't see how that relates to showing that they are, or were ever power metal. I replaced this link with one to allmusic.com. Supercodes 06:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh I'm sorry I didn't really relize that it was a review, any bad sources I have and you feel are not right feel free to replace them, but please notify me. Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 06:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

At finally for all "addiers", Cob i power with black metal's white sounding vocals!! Listen to it.

The Trooper
In the article in the trivia section it says Contrary to popular belief, Children of Bodom has never covered the songs "The Trooper" by Iron Maiden , when they actually have, it is on the follow the reaper album


 * First, it's Follow the Reaper, and second, they covered "Aces High" by Iron Maiden on the deluxe edition of Follow the Reaper. QelDroma06 00:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * trust me, they've covered the trooper, i have the song on my pc. it exists. ive listened to it many times. im listening to it now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.134.184.37 (talk) 23:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * If you've got it from Gnutella or another P2P then it's not them. There's a hell of a lot of songs labeled "Children of Bodom" that are not them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lhademmor (talk • contribs) 09:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Go to the Homepage, they say they never did it!!!! http://cobhc.com/index.php?id=faq This FAQ lists every cover they did and when they released it, and it says clearly: Please note that the band NEVER recorded Iron Maiden's The Trooper or Europe's Final Countdown. --Metalpotato 13:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * A band called Graveworm did "The Trooper." They sound a lot like early Bodom, I think that's why people got confused. Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 18:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Even more likely it is the old cover by Sentenced back from around 1995. Most current Sentenced fans will of course not recognize the pretty much different style of Sentenced of the past. This might have given breeding ground to the misattribution, since both bands are at least from Finland. Matti Nuortio, Oulu, Finland (talk) 21:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I mean, I have heard some of the MP3's misattributed to Children of Bodom and they have all been definitely the Sentenced version. Matti Nuortio, Oulu, Finland (talk) 21:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for Trivia addition
Songs such as Red Light in My Eyes Pt.2 and Black Widow contain traces of some of the music from the Film Amadeus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.245.106.117 (talk) 01:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Melodic thashcore
..cob genre —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownmetalheadd (talk • contribs) 07:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a genre.  Zouavman   Le   Zouave   14:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Oops! I did it again cover
Was Kimberley Goss' vocals used in the intro of their Oops cover? Or whose female vocals were those? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bopash4 (talk • contribs) 04:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * None other than Britney Spears..... --CircafuciX 04:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it seems that they used the original Britney vocals in the intro. In any case, those vocals are uncredited...  Zouavman   Le   Zouave   12:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You think so? I listened to the original version of Oops, and compared it with the vocals in COB's cover. They were fairly different. Are you sure it was Britney herself? Bopash4 12:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Jonna Kosonen did the vocals :) Mfybht 12:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

New album info
hey everyone,

I'd like to announce that the new album is going to be named Blooddrunk check http://www.cobhc.com/studio07.php for the information( it sais so in the last section of november the 14th) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikkiej999 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't sure why Skeletons in a Closet (2009) isn't already listed; track listings have been revealed recently too. I don't know how to start a new topic on Wiki. Keraunoscopia (talk) 22:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trivia & Quotations
I removed unsourced and trivial material that does not belong in a section. It can be kept if it is sourced and put in the biography somewhere.

Trivia

 * Children of Bodom's symbol is the Grim Reaper — jokingly nicknamed Roy by the band.
 * The single Children of Bodom included, in addition to the title track, the songs "Repent (Whore)" by Cryhavoc and "Iron, Steel, Metal" by Wizzard, which are both mistaken to be covers performed by Children of Bodom.
 * After the 2006 Eurovision Song Contest, several European tabloids, including the Daily Mail, The Sun and Expressen, published an old promotional photo of Children of Bodom, claiming them to be Lordi "unmasked". The confusion stemmed from Erna Siikavirta being included in the photo; she went on to be one of the original members of Lordi.
 * The song "Talking of the Trees" (from demo "Shining") contains several riffs which were also used in Mask of Sanity (Follow The Reaper)

Quotations

 * The quotation "From now on we're enemies - you and I" from "Warheart" (Hatebreeder) is taken from the movie Amadeus (Alexi's favourite movie), from the character of Antonio Salieri, played by F. Murray Abraham. Janne Wirman also used another quotation from this movie in several albums by his side-project Warmen.
 * The quotation "Death? What do you all know about death?" as a preface to "Sixpounder" (Hate Crew Deathroll) is taken from the movie Platoon, from the character of Sgt. Bob Barnes, played by Tom Berenger.
 * The quotation "My pain is constant and sharp and I do not hope for a better world for anyone, in fact I want my pain to be inflicted on others. I want no one to escape." as an ending to "Bodom Beach Terror" and preface to "Angels Don't Kill" (Hate Crew Deathroll) is taken from the movie American Psycho, from the character of Patrick Bateman, played by Christian Bale.
 * The quotation from "Follow the Reaper": "Death, be not proud, though some have called thee Mighty and dreadful, for thou art not so." is from the work Holy Sonnet X, of the 17th century poet John Donne.
 * The quotation from "The Nail" (Something Wild) "Your eyes are full of hate, 41. That's good. Hate keeps a man alive, it gives him strength.", is from the 1959 biblical epic film, Ben-Hur, and the sound playing in the back is from the opening scene of the horror film A Nightmare On Elm Street.
 * The quotation from the song "Follow the Reaper", "I was only 21 when I died." is from the movie The Exorcist III, from a friend of the detective played by George C. Scott.
 * The quotation from the song "Taste of My Scythe" on Follow the Reaper,"..and rip and cut and mutilate the innocent. His friends, again and again and on and on..." is from the movie The Exorcist III and is Fr. Karas/the Devil's character/the Gemini killer played by Brad Dourif.
 * The intro of Deadnight Warrior is from the TV Movie Stephen King's It

Skeeker &#91; Talk &#93; 04:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Bodom Covers
There's no reference in this article to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodom_Covers ...? Thunderhawk89 (talk) 10:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's because this is no official COB release. Just read the discussion page of the article. I'd appreciate if anybody can delete this wrong article. Abtreibung (talk) 19:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've tagged it as a hoax since there are no sources to back up the album's existence. I've also tagged it for proposed deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 00:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Laiho dislikes Something Wild the most?
The article says "Although Laiho is very critical of all of the music he has written, he notes that he dislikes Something Wild the most of all of his albums." but in a Scythes Of Bodom interview Alexi said "[Follow The Reaper] is my least favourite album.".

Source: http://www.scythes-of-bodom.com/site.php?go=interviews&lang=en&int=interview06part2

Somebody should change this in the article. Abtreibung (talk) 16:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Is this really even worth adding to the article?  Zouavman   Le   Zouave   16:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thrash metal
This should be added as a genre, because of Blooddrunk and especially songs like "Roadkill Morning." All Music Guide states that Bodom went thrashy in that album's review. I was told to discuss this genre here before re-adding it to the page. Let the comments roll in! Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 20:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've removed it because I didn't see any labeling of thrash at all in the review. Allmusic is being questioned as a reliable source now for genres (especially for metal but sometimes they're right, sometimes they're very wrong) so it would be best to find another source for thrash. − ₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪  kaiden  00:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think they are very thrash. (Woo! I saw them too!) Burningclean  [speak]  00:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The correct way to do it is remove all of the inline citations from the info box (which is just odd in and of itself) and move them to the genre dispute section with accurate rewording. "Allmusic guide critics states that.....", "According to John Doe writing for (insert review here) CoB exhibits elements of neoclassical metal"..and so on and so forth. That would be the easiest and most informative way to do it.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 00:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

For some things, citations are dumb. Only people who've never listened to Slayer, Testament, early Metallica and early/current Megadeth don't know what thrash is. To tell you how retarded some things are, there's a source by thrash metal on Slayer's page. Wow, they're only, like, THE GODFATHERS OF THRASH!!!! But back to my point. All it takes is one listen to Blooddrunk, and it becomes very obvious that COB is now a much more thrash-influenced band. Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 16:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * That's called original research.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 16:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No, it's called knowing your genres. Honestly, if you can't hear thrash on Blooddrunk, then that shows everyone how much you know about metal. It's like denying that Nirvana was grunge, or that Motley Crue was glam, or that Iced Earth is power metal. Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 14:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This isn't the place for discussing relative knowledge of music genres. We go by verifiability not perceived/subjective truth. These talk pages are for making improvements. Original research is not an improvement.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 21:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I found sources that confirm that Bodom of late is thrash. You might actually have to scroll down and read the website (God forbid, people act like it's such a big deal to READ), but it does directly state that Blooddrunk (and Bodom) are thrash. Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 14:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Kimberly Goss
She's like the 6th Beatle of COB. She's written at least one song for them on every album except Something Wild and Follow the Reaper. I think she even did some guest vocals on one song. So, should she be considered a "side-member" or something? I think that her contributions warrant this. 68.211.225.53 (talk) 13:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * She only wrote some lyrics and did a scream besides being a session keyboardist ten years ago. She's not really important for the band's career. Abtreibung (talk) 17:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I think she's more important than you make her out to be, Abtreibung. She's been a part of almost every Bodom album. But I wouldn't call her the "6th Beatle of Bodom," if you know what I mean. Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 14:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The Ramones cover
It's included on both Hate Crew Deathroll and AYDY. My question is, did Alexander Kuoppala play on both versions? Or was the AYDY version re-recorded with Roope? Please tell me so I can put it in the article. 68.211.95.120 (talk) 14:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It's the same version, so Alexander is playing on it but I don't think it's worth mentioning in the article. Maybe it can be mentioned on the cover songs article which cover songs were played in which line-up but I still don't think it's that important. Abtreibung (talk) 06:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It probably is worth mentioning in the AYDY article, then. I was wondering that exact same thing, if Alexander played on both versions or not. Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 14:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Re-Release of albums
hey just got a email about children of bodom re releasing "somthing wild" "hatebreeder" "tokyo warhearts" and "follow the repear" all of which have 2 bonus tracks and a video except tokyo warhearts i was just wondering if this should be on here or the album page about these re releases if proof is needed i will post image of email —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.178.33 (talk) 22:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead and paste the email, just to give people some proof. I bought Something Wild not long ago, and it's a rerelease with "Children of Bodom" and "Mass Hypnosis" as the bonus tracks. I know this is true b/c the album originally came out in 1997, but on the back of the case it says "Copyright 2008 Spinefarm Records." When you take the cd out, there's an ad underneath that shows you which albums got rereleased. You brought up a good point, man! Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 19:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, it is true. I have all of the reissues. Burningclean  [speak]  23:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

ok found this image on cobhc.com http://www.cobhc.com/bilder/hhflyer.jpg id buy these albums for more imformation but sadly im a bit stuck for cash at the moment —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.69.108 (talk) 22:40, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Huh, that's interesting that it says "UK-only releases," because I live in the States, and I bought the rereleased Something Wild at an FYE store! Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thrash metal... again
Is this thrash metal tag really necessary in the band's genre description? Surely blooddrunk has a lot of thrash on it, but I don't think is enough to put as another genre of the band. All other genres quoted have been part of almost any band album, and if this tagging continues, soon we will have black metal also due to hatebreeder album. I'm proposing the removal of thrash metal as a genre. Haxxiy (talk) 23:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, none of those genres should be listed in the infobox, as they're mostly tangential or genres the band has dabbled in. All of that stuff belongs in the genre debate section, references and all.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 01:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thats what makes so pointless the constant genre adding in the page. Cob mix so much styles in their music that should be followed Cdrale of Filth example putting only extreme metal and discussing the matter in a separate section. Haxxiy (talk) 16:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thrash should stay, and so should everything else. If it's sourced, then just leave it. Besides, Bodom has ALWAYS had some thrash in their sound. It's just that Blooddrunk had it the most. Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Either that, or we'll have to put this in the genre: "Unknown, because the people here on Wikipedia just can't decide on anything!" Festering Rat Corpse (talk) 18:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, thrash should stay and so should everything else that's referenced. However, it's not properly structured. Only relevant genres should be listed in the info box. The rest (and their sources) should be converted to prose and placed in the debate section. The statements should be geared towards what the references say and who is saying it, not just saying Children of Bodom are thrash with a little footnote next to it.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 18:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, the page already have a genre debate section and all those genres should be there instead. The best would be put an umbrela term or two most relevant genres in the genre box and all remaining genres in the debate - even thrash, because what I sugested in first place is just the removal of thrash as a relevant genre to the whole band work. Haxxiy (talk) 21:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC) I've Removed thrash as it only desribes one album. Just beacause a band records a album is a style does not mean that that genre is notable enough to be listed in the genre box.Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 02:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Leave lead sentence alone!!!!!!!!!
This is about the 900th time I've changed "Children of Bodom is HEAVY METAL band" back to "Children of Bodom is METAL band".

Leave it the fuck alone! Don't give me that crap, "Not everyone listens to metal. Metal can mean the object of metal, blah blah". If you're on the CHILDREN OF BODOM page, you should know that METAL MEANS THE SAME EXACT THING AS HEAVY METAL.

96.242.38.28 (talk) 08:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Jack
 * "METAL MEANS THE SAME EXACT THING AS HEAVY METAL." Then why change it? Why is it such a big deal if it's the exact same thing? If you can't give us a legitimate excuse for why you so desperately want it to be metal, then we will continue to keep it heavy metal. Heavy metal is the proper phrase for the genre. Therefore, we say heavy metal, not just metal.Almosthonest06 (talk) 14:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I reread my post and realized I didn't make sense, lol. I meant that people might think CoB is a HEAVY Metal band (By Heavy Metal I mean Black Sabbath, Deep Purple. The REAL Heavy Metal). If we just put metal, it's very general and broad, because' metal could mean Speed Metal, Power Metal Death Metal, Melodeath Metal, etc. Thus, not leaving any confusion to be had.

96.242.38.28 (talk) 01:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)Jack


 * I agree with the anon's rationale completely. Colloquially, metal can incorporate many different sub/extreme genres, while heavy metal tends to be more narrow.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 02:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't get me wrong, I agree with both of you, but what we are talking about here is personal opinions about the words. Other people might think they mean the same or they might think of it vice-versa. I believe the general population, outside of metal, think of the whole genre as one: heavy metal. For encyclopedic reasons, however, I believe we should keep it the more general "heavy metal". Almosthonest06 (talk) 03:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point, it also seems to agree with our article on Heavy Metal.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 04:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Neo-Classical?
What ever happened to this tag? From what I've read, it was a large influence on the band's earlier works, but it's been removed. Anyone want to clarify to me why? 72.72.222.152 (talk) 01:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * They have neo-classical elements, but the reference belongs in the genre debate section only, as it's a tangential genre. Also, it needs to be sourced.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 00:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Covers
Why bother adding that if none of the covers are listed? 74.140.139.130 (talk) 00:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Images
Do any of the free images used in this article (with the exception of maybe Alexi) have any relevance to the text/section they are in? Do they actually convey something that the words themselves do not? If they are merely decorative, they should probably just be removed, or placed in more relevant articles, such as those for the individual band members. Either that, or the text should be adjusted for relevance sake.

 Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 00:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Real genre
Their iTunes bio says "black metal" outfit which is stupid, cause they are obviously not. They are not power metal, either, they don't have fantasy lyrics. Melodic death metal is a lot harsher than CoB, it's jut regular death metal w/keyboard. On their myspace, it states "metal". They are, simply, heavy metal, nothing more, nothing less. If that's what they want to call themselves, then why doesn't Wikipedia honor that? Just because they have harsh vocals doesn't make them death metal. Hell, Dope has harsher vocals than these guys, and Dope's not even metal. Please, just change the genre to metal. JazzlineB (talk) 17:41, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We can report what the band says if we have a source for it, although myspace shouldn't be used. However, typically the band itself is not an authority on this subject. Just because members state that they are "metal" and nothing more, doesn't mean we redescribe them in those terms. We merely report and cite what they say. Currently, the lead is good and bad. It gives a broad genre, but then goes on to say that the band is a cross between two other metal-subgenres (yes, with sources, but done incorrectly).  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 17:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

"Melodic death metal is a lot harsher than CoB, it's jut regular death metal w/keyboard" <--- you're saying melodeath is harsher than common death metal? Oh well, whatsoever. And in their previous albums, the vocals was a lot harsher. At the gates-ish stuff. At least, they're "extreme metal" and that perhaps should stay in genre box (broad statement) with a section explaining better this matter. But for do anyything it would need a damn-hard-to-achieve consensus here. 189.58.43.4 (talk) 23:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

What metal-fan-wiki-editors need to understand is that melodeath and death metal are two different genres, and that melodic death metal bands DO NOT have to be death metal. It's like this: if you took away the melodies and/or keyboard elements from the band and just letf the "metal" instruments and the vocals, would it still be death metal? Most of the time, no. Melodeath bands have much more experimentation with their musical styles, often including vocal styles. If CoB had no melodies, their more recent works would be simply extreme metal, since there is no death growling, a necesity of death metal. Melodic Death Metal now adays is more a term used to describe extreme metal acts that incorporate a fair amount of melody into their style without being able to be counted as a different genre. Like for example, Devildriver. It's groove metal which goes under extreme metal. In their newest release they incoporated a fair bit of melody into their guitar riffs. The vocals there are extreme, but not so much deathgrowling. Thus, we add a melodeath tag to incorporate their newer style. Zaruyache (talk) 00:06, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Some help guys? Genre slot..
hey guys..just really curious....What happened to the Genre slot on top for this band? it's gone? for all Bands actually? all artists..i hope this is just for maintenance..it'd be really bad if wiki took it out..Thank u guys...hope someone can clear this out... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.154.231.159 (talk) 06:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia took the genre sloat off all the artist awhile back because of the "Genre Wars," although it seems like they decided to put it back on. Emo777 (talk) 22:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hate Crew?
What exactly does  "Hate Crew" refer to? I know that as of knowing about Children of Bodom,  the term  "COBHC" » Children  of Bodom Hate Crew is  used quite frequently,  which lead to  me to believe  that the term  "Hate Crew" refers  to the band, or could "Children of  Bodom  Hate  Crew" (or just  simply "Hate Crew") mean the fans of Children of Bodom? GunMetal Angel 00:21, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

If you own the album Hate Crew Deathroll, look in the lyric booklet, at the thank-you list. They refer to their fans as the "Hate Crew." Hope that helps! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.174.219.194 (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * A little inconsistency was found on the official fansite here, where the band members themselves are referred to as the "Hate Crew." This probably means it is used either from the perspective of the band or the fans. FireCrystal (talk) 22:56, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, if that's the case, then I'm removing "COBHC" from the "Also known as" section in the infobox, I own Are You Dead Yet? and Children of Bodom state a group of Finnish fans as "tha real muthaphukkin' Hate Crew" in the booklet. -- GunMetal Angel

Melodic black metal
Should this not be added to the genre list? Their early work is better described as melodic black metal than melodic death metal. COB are also listed on the melodic black metal page with "(first two albums)" in brackets. We could add "Melodic black metal (early)" to the list as their pre-Hate Crew Deathroll albums have a very different sound (notably Alexi's vocals, which are in a black metal style). What do you guys think? Xanthic-Ztk (talk) 03:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think a simple consensus could change anything here. We need actual sources saying they were melodic black metal (though I know that they came from black metal roots earlier on which I think is pre-COB). FireCrystal (talk) 03:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Power metal?
Are you kidding me? CoB couldn't be less power metal. Alexi even made this comment in an interview:

"To me, our music is just metal; it's not black metal, it's not death metal, it's not thrash. But I don't really care what people call it, as long as they don't call it power metal."

I know that a lot of people find similarities to power metal in their music, but I'd say it definitely tilts over more to melodic death.

Interview source, scroll down to find it: http://www.guitarworld.com/50_greatest_guitar_albums A Powerful Weakness (talk) 07:39, 6 August 2009 (UTC)A Powerful Weakness


 * Yeah, and in a video interview several days ago, Alexi said they weren't black and they weren't thrash. He never mentioned power or death.  Even Alexi can't keep it straight any more.  There's a genre for every band out there because we're finally beginning to see bands that defy definition, unlike the 90s where everything was easily classified as nu-metal or whatever genre-du-jour people were making up. Genre wars should be listed as one of the biggest waste of resources on the planet.  –  Kerαunoςcopia  23:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)