Talk:Gatecrasher

primary article for the term
deleted? of course not, but it shouldn't be the primary article for the term "gatecrasher." there's a term in wide, international use by that name. that should be the primary article, not one with the parenthetical (person) after it. especially because due to some kind of confusing nonesense, other terms like "gatecrashing" redirect to it, which is baffling. Youdontsmellbad 16:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

deletion
why should this page be deleted? Gatecrasher is one of the largest dance music events of it's kind in the world... Nick Boulevard 23:12, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Is there a suggestion that it should be? In it's time it was easily the most influential nightclub in the world, i met people in there from all kinds of countries that came to the UK just to visit GC - including Japan, Australia and Isreal to name but a few - the very notion of deletion is rediculus.. the actual event itself in it's current state should be deleted though, but that's a different conversation entirely ;) --Streaky 14:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Changes to the brand
In 2003 'Gatecrasher' the event changed to 'Crasher'. At the same time, the venue 'Republic' changed its name to 'Gatecrasher 1'. This change is evidenced by historical flyers (probably by Designers Republic) which show the event labelled as 'Gatecrasher' but with 'Gate' crossed/scribbled out. This horrific business revamp (which coincided with a literal refurbishment) pretty much marked the end of what could be called the 'classic' Gatecrasher era and was, in my opinion, the death knell of trance music in the north of England.

Gatecrasher Birmingham?
Has there been any information made available about Gatecrasher Birmingham (GB) I know that it has take over what was The Works in Broad Street - the place is massive. It's only 100 yards from the old Baker's Night club. 77.100.14.241 (talk) 02:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Marking for Cleanup
I have marked the article for cleanup and done a bit myself so far. The history section and spin-off sections don't read very well. The history section is missing a lot of the early history. The Resident DJ's section can probably be removed when the history section is expanded. The albums could do with DJ's involved in mixing them being added and any chart positions. Benoutram (talk) 22:54, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Resident DJ's
Is this section required? Notable DJ's can be mentioned in the history section. Benoutram (talk) 22:54, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

C.R.E.A.M.
C.R.E.A.M. a night held in Birmingham is not the same as Cream Liverpool, nor is it the Wu-Tang clan single C.R.E.A.M.! Please consider this before altering the text. Benoutram (talk) 21:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Area, Watford
Comment on main article claims Gatecrasher own Area, but I find no information to support this. A google search shows that Gatecrasher appear to run events at the club but there is no more information about this or ownership. Can anybody verify this to be true or false and provide references please? Flibblesan (talk) 23:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Gatecrasher's original venue.
I'm pretty much sure that Gatecrasher's orginal venue was not Gatecrasher One. It was in Bakers night club just up the road from what is now Gatecrasher Birmingham.. I think this needs to be checked out. 82.46.171.232 (talk) 04:01, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * No it was in a (literal) warehouse event in Sheffield originally. Later on it moved to what was then called the republic which had various club nights, IIRC Gatecrasher was once monthly originally. Those days in Brum was all about Godskitchen at CODE aka AIR and Miss Moneypenny's at various destinations. Either of those two are acceptable answers. Streaky (talk) 01:27, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Not a single source...!
Needs fixing or deleting. Boils (talk) 12:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Revision of article in light of recent controversy
Recent updates were made to this page due to a recent controversy involving Gatecrasher, but the content was poorly written and was not cited properly. I revised this today, but realized that the entire article needs overhauling. I managed to copyedit most of the article, but it still needs a lot of work, which is why I have updated the templates at the top of the page. As the controversy is ongoing, please do not use this page to vent frustrations with the company, as this is not the purpose of Wikipedia. Thanks.--Soulparadox (talk) 18:37, 24 August 2014 (UTC)