Talk:List of glam metal bands and artists

Added XYZ, Danger Danger, Steelheart and Shotgun Messiah. Others need adding too
Finally, here is a proper list of glam metal bands. This is a great article. I have added to the list XYZ, Danger Danger, Steelheart and Shotgun Messiah. I've added citations too, but they are written in a simpler form, which I hope is still appropriate. If it is not good enough, please make it the same with the other citations. There are still lots of other groups which should be added, like Tigertailz or House of Lords. And pictures should be added for every band too.FateForger (talk) 11:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Well thank you very much. I could format the references for you I suppose. RG (talk) 15:37, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I saw you deleted Lillian Axe and Roxx Gang which had been added by another user. They did not have citations but they should be on this list as they both were glam metal and they both have an article on wikipedia. Is there a particular reason for taking them away?FateForger (talk) 23:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * In the meantime I've added back Roxx Gang and Lillian Axe, but I provided citations in case this was the problem. Hope everything is ok now. FateForger (talk) 23:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * "there a particular reason for taking them away?" Yes, all acts must be reliably sourced, no exceptions. I don't want this page turning into an unreferenced mess like several of the other music lists(see List of power metal bands for example.) RG (talk) 05:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

This list is ludicrous. To begin with, all these labels and classifications are for purists with nothing better to do. Either you like the music, or you don't. Putting Guns and Roses and Queen in the same category with Warrant and Poison is like calling Iron Maiden a jazz ensemble. Attempts to justify these categorizations is like calling someone from across the world "brother," because like, hey, we're all originally from Africa and if you trace it back far enough we're all related, dude. Ooze2b (talk) 14:42, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia isn't about the truth, it's about references. If there were reliable sources claiming Bay City Rollers were a grindcore act or that the MC5 were a bubblegum pop band, then there is nothing we can do about it. In making a list like this, we're going to come across many acts that didn't play the music, but the only way not to remain unbiased is to include them. RG (talk) 18:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

"If there were reliable sources claiming..." So 'reliable sources' can claim anything they want to? They can gossip or make an error and we're all stuck with it? I mean really, Queen is glam metal? I kinda get the glam part, but metal? Wikipedia doesn't have to be about absolute-flaming-letters-in-the-sky truth, but it shouldn't be about gossip, stigma, or referenced opinion either (unless a part of a larger article where it is clearly pointed out that an opinion is involved.) You're making a list of bands who once upon a time were referred to as glam, and that involves a lot of subjectivity. Avoiding subjectivity and opinion is the entire point of references. In essence you're making a list of opinions with references, but without specifically citing that these are opinions and therefore not definitive. BTW, I am not intending this as a personal attack, and hope it doesn't come across that way. Ooze2b (talk) 15:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources claim what they claim. This is a list of bands which "have been described as glam metal by professional journalists", so it is made clear that they are opinions. Moreover, they are professional opinions. On the other hand, as I have already written, I am the first to say some bands in the list were never glam metal but only influenced by it or had an influence on it. However, these bands should still be included. In the section below the point has already been discussed. FateForger (talk) 13:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. The opinion of a professional journalist is not a fact. It may be a fact that a professional journalist declares a particular band to be glam, but the fact of the proclamation doesn't make the proclamation a fact. It's not like there is a blood test for glam -- it's all just somebody's opinion, and a 'professional journalists' opinion is no better than anybody else's. The problem with these classification lists is that they are driven by purists. 'Glam metal isn't true metal,' etc and so forth. And unfortunately, we all know that there are people out there who take Wikipedia as gospel, rather than as a starting point for their own research. That means that what you post will be taken as 'truth,' and the disclaimer at the start of the list is pretty weak. Anyway, I'm not trolling. I've said my piece and I'll agree to disagree. Ooze2b (talk) 14:08, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you when you say there are people that take Wikipedia as the gospel while they shouldn't. This is why I added the new section "Making things clearer and preventing discussions". Please read it and give your opinion. For the rest, there obviously is not a blood test for glam as there is no blood test for anything which is not scientific. This is why genres must be decided according to professional opinions: they still are opinions, but they are reliable. Professional opinions ARE better than anybody else's. Otherwise nothing could be stated at all when it comes to genres. FateForger (talk) 14:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Guns N' Roses and Def Leppard
I agree that Def Leppard were glam metal, maybe not in every song but they still were. I openly state it in my personal page. When it comes to Guns N' Roses though, I believe they were more hard rock and sleaze rock rather than metal, which is what one of the two sources state. Anyway, if this article gets visited by lots of people I think there will be lots of fighting on these two acts unless more sources are provided soon. I have doubts about GNR myself, unless we include sleaze into glam. I think that the endless discussions in Def Leppard's talk page about them being glam or not are well known. It's better to prevent them! FateForger (talk) 17:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Neither of these acts I consider hair metal myself(Def Leppard were more pop metal and NWoBHM flavored while GNR I see as more of a straightforward metal band), but as the lead says "The list includes bands and artists that have been described as glam metal by professional journalists at some stage in their career." Guns are perhaps the most controversial example on the list. While we have Guitar World, About.com, Rolling Stone, Ian Christe's book Sound of the Beast: The Complete Headbanging History of Heavy Metal cite the group as a major hair metal band, we also have sources from Blender, the BBC, and VH1's Heavy: The Story of Metal claimed they were responsible for killing off hair metal. It's well known that the group were influenced by early hair metal acts like Hanoi Rocks, but were they really a hair band themselves? I believe that the band's biography by Stephen Davis Watch You Bleed: The Saga of Guns N' Roses, had some mixes feeling on the topic(I can't really remember all too well what the book stated because I read it months ago.) RG (talk) 19:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to see we are on the same wavelength. I believe (and hope) your reply will be sufficient to prevent users form starting discussions on the subject. The lead of the article is perfect. FateForger (talk) 19:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

guns n roses is sleaze rock and def leppard is glam rockVal hallen (talk) 15:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Guns n Roses were formed in the sunset strip scene, but were clearly trying not to be glam metal. In particular their original rhythm section (McKagan/Adler) was more traditional rock 'n roll or punk rock than heavy metal (Heavy metal rhythm sections sound more like a military march, rock 'n roll rhythm sections swing). Most Glam metal bands musical origins can be traced back to Van Halen, whereas Guns n'roses were more based on Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones with some punk rock thrown in for good measure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.176.12.249 (talk) 15:00, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Two columns? + Discussion on Queen, Helloween and Celtic Frost
Since the list keeps getting longer, wouldn't it be better to sort it out in two columns? There is a lot of blank space next to the table. I'd do it, but I don't know how to do it. FateForger (talk) 20:43, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know how to make a column that would stand to the right of this one, though I do know how to add another row to the column. Perhaps a "Country" row where we could put a flagicon, but I wouldn't worry about that now. Our main focus should be to protect the page from edit wars, unsourced additions, etc. The issue of the size we could handle later. RG (talk) 04:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I finally figured out how to turn it into two columns. Problem solved. RG (talk) 18:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * This is great news, as it was really getting long. The page keeps getting better and better mostly thanks to your work, but I do have a point I'd like to make. I know that there is reference for them, but Helloween and Celtic Frost are quite distant from glam, don't you believe? I mean it is not the case of Guns or Def Leppard where they are not properly glam but they are in a sense related to it. Helloween and Celtic frost are so distant that I believe there could me more than a discussion on them. I believe your source could be disputed. What do you think about it? Personaly, I believe they might be too different. FateForger (talk) 21:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Celtic Frost, while mainly an early black metal/thrash act, they did do one whole hair metal album. Cold Lake is often cited as their stab at it by multiple reliable sources (examples: Sound of the Beast, Spin, etc.) I personally believe that one out of six albums is enough to qualify them for the list (though we may need more editorial opinions on issues like them.) As for Helloween, I agree that there is no way they are a hair band, but Chuck Klosterman's book Fargo rock city: a heavy metal odyssey in rural Nörth Daköta specifically includes them on his run through of hair metal groups on page 28 (I believe he also mentions other controversial examples like Accept, but I can't be sure of this because my time on that page expired on Google books.)


 * As of now you and me are the only people really getting involved with this project. Hopefully other users will get involved in this debate. RG (talk) 22:24, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I did not know about that album, and now that I do I agree with you, one album is enough. As for Helloween, a proper source is a proper source. I can see the connection in the case of Queen, though it is controversial. Don't worry about the rest: other people will get involved sooner or later. FateForger (talk) 20:53, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The thing with Queen is that they were a very eclectic group. They did play glam rock and heavy metal, so it isn't that surprising that critics would call them glam metal(even though it's somewhat incorrect.) If you want we could put (Cold Lake era) next to Celtic Frost to clarify things. RG (talk) 00:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Celtic Frost was definitely NOT a Hair metal band!!! They were somewhat influenced by the Hair bands on their Cold Lake album, but not even this album is precisely Glam metal. It doesn't sound like Mötley Crüe, Poison or Warrant at all. For further information you should check the Wikipedia article on the subject and also the review of the Allmusic guide on this album . --Rivet138 (talk) 01:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is without a doubt a hair metal album. The look and the sound are both very much in glam metal fashion. RG (talk) 02:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * What? It doesn't sound like Hair metal at all. It actually kind of resembles 90s Megadeth (streamlined Thrash). You are either not familiar with the Hair metal sound or you should listen Cold Lake more carefully (without prejudices). --Rivet138 (talk) 13:31, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * "It doesn't sound like Hair metal at all" That's a point of view. Multiple sources state that the band did do some experimentation with hair metal during the Cold Lake era. RG (talk) 18:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The fact that they "experimented" with Hair metal doesn't make Cold Lake a Glam metal album. --Rivet138 (talk) 20:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe it would benefit you to read WP:NPOV. In layman's terms: source > opinion. Now can you please stop the edit warring? RG (talk) 20:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You should at least argue why you think my point of view isn't neutral. I don't see it more subjective than yours. A lot of people think that Cold Lake isn't a Glam metal album. I've quoted the review of the AllMusicGuide, did you even read it? The guy from the BNRmetal pages also thinks that Cold Lake isn't properly a Glam metal album. Believing that Celtic Frost had a Glam phase has a lot to do with defamations from the metal press and community. --Rivet138 (talk) 16:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Now I believe this discussion should end. This is what the beginning of this article states: "The list includes bands and artists that have been described as glam metal by professional journalists at some stage in their career". Now it seems to me there is a source so the band should stay on the list. It is not a matter if they really were glam or not. Read the article carefully. They have been described as glam, so they should be here. Moreover, Cold Lake is at least closely related to glam. It sounds like a very "heavy metal" glam album. And remember, it is not a matter of opinion, but of sources. The band has been described as glam metal by at least ONE RELIABLE source AT ONE STAGE IN THEIR CAREER. To make things clearer, I've specified close to their entry they were glam only in the Cold Lake period. Hope this is enough to put arguments to rest. FateForger (talk) 17:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * FateForger basically summarized this article pretty well. Wikipedia is not about what a band actually is, but instead what they have been cited as. When he and I were making this article, we disagreed with some of these groups on this list, but they were all sourced and should be left. Also, BNRmetal pages doesn't appear to be a reliable source. "I've quoted the review of the AllMusicGuide, did you even read it?" Yes, it claims the album to traditional metal and pop-metal, but keep in mind that a band can play more than style at a time. RG (talk) 18:13, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Alice Cooper
What would you think about adding Alice Cooper to the list considering the period of Trash and Hey Stoopid? FateForger (talk) 20:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Personally I believe Alice did go through a hair metal phase in the '80s like several other bands (I consider '80s Kiss hair metal.) Though his '70s stuff I see as just classic metal. There is evidence that during the '80s he did experiment with hair metal. "Poison" for instance Rolling Stone with specifically called a hair metal song, however there website doesn't appear to be working right now so I can't show you the page. Blender call him the "the godfather of scary glam-metal", but does that mean he is a precursor or a genuine hair metal act? It's not to hard to find sources that he was an influence on it, but we'll need a source citing an album or him as hair metal to add him to the list. RG (talk) 00:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well allmusic cites him as hair metal (allmusic always uses hair metal instead of the less derogatory glam metal) in the article about his famous album Trash. Here is the link . Do you think this is enough? FateForger (talk) 16:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well technically it calls the album "pop-metal" in the review, which doesn't necessarily mean it's hair metal. I actually tried to make an article for pop metal, but it was deleted without even a debate. Although it does say it was directed at the Motley Crue audience.


 * I don't see hair metal as a derogatory term. I use it way more often then "glam metal." Hair metal sounds more appropiate to me because with the label "glam metal" it creates confusion and sometimes causes people to confuse these hair bands with '70s glam rock acts like David Bowie and T. Rex. RG (talk) 17:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * In the text of the review says it is pop-metal, but in the column on the left it says hair metal too.The "style column" is about genres and not styles (I have read people arguing on this), because allmusic uses the "genre column" for a very generic categorization and the "style column" for a more precise and specific genre description.


 * Coming to the terms hair/glam, I agree they are both right. Hair metal generates less confusion, but it was born as a derogatory term to describe the bands' style in the beginning of the 90s. In the end, they are both ok. What matters is the way they are used. FateForger (talk) 17:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

alice cooper is classic metalVal hallen (talk) 15:58, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Making things clearer and preventing discussions
The list keeps getting longer and longer, including minor (but still perfectly glam) bands and bands which are not all that glam. In order to make the most important bands stand out, what do you think of writing their names in bold? I know that the term "most important" is not encyclopedic, but we could adopt a criteria based on popularity, sales and adherence to glam metal. I would say that good examples of these bands could be Motley Cure, Poison, Ratt, Cinderella, Warrant. Coming to bands like Helloween or Queen, which have lots of references which state they were very distant form glam metal, a term like "influenced" or "related" could be added next to them. By doing this not only the most important glam metal bands would stand out form all the less famous ones, but lots of long discussions could be prevented too. What do you think? FateForger (talk) 13:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem with that suggestion is that doing such would show favoritism and we would all be pushing POV by deciding which bands were undeniable hair metal and which bands never were. As you put it, putting certain names in bold would be "not encyclopedic." The thing with making a list like this is that we can't just include Twisted Sister and Ratt, unfortunatly we have to include the controversial examples. RG (talk) 03:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

The list should be like this
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_metal#Elenco_di_gruppi_hair.2Fglam_metal

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleaze_metal#Gruppi

Put all these bands in alphabetical order. And with the same style these lists were done.

JKKDARK (talk) 20:11, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The list is already in alphabetical order and those two lists you mention are both unsourced. Not to brag or anything, but this page is in much better condition than those two. RG (talk) 02:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

The actual list contains artists like Andrew W.K., Mother Love Bone, Marilyn Manson, etc, which never played Glam Metal. This list is a joke. Maybe the other lists are not sourced but most of the bands are correct. There are several sources over the net claiming these bands played Glam Metal.

JKKDARK (talk) 04:41, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't blame me, blame the critics. Our goal here was to create an accurately sourced article, not a factually correct article. RG (talk) 16:41, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Good to hear that you're not interested in creating a factually correct article. In that much, it's a resounding success. Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:58, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I see that the cite for Slade and Sweet is a link to an IMDB page for a film, which doesn't appear to mention them anyway. How is that a decent source? Neither approached metal at any point. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That source is mentioning the film Metal: A Headbanger's Journey (in another article I saw that when this movie was used as a source it was put in that format with that link.) The film's director, Sam Dunn, includes the two bands on his list on his chart in the film in the glam metal category. Other sources can be found for these two bands being hair metal acts including Metallica: The Frayed Ends of Metal,  1001 Songs: The Great Songs of All Time and the Artists, Stories and Secrets Behind Them on page 620, and Newsday. Neither of these acts I consider hair bands or metal, but they are sourced. Again like I said, "Don't blame me, blame the critics." RG (talk) 22:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Why is Sam Dunn a reliable source? As I've probably said before, the fact that "someone else" has said something is true, does not mean it's reliable. Particularly when no attempt is made to figure out if these people are ever right about anything. It cheapens Wikipedia to the nth degree to include an article which does not even purport to be factually correct. One of those sources even says "Sweet and Slade created glam metal, which was hard rock..." It's just nonsensical drivel - he just made it up as went along. I really must write a book and say that Whitney Houston is speed metal, because if it appears in a book, it must be reliable. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:21, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Relax, relax Breton. No need to get so wound up over such a small issue. Now let's get back tot the topic at hand. Sam Dunn has made multiple documentaries with each receiving good amounts of media coverage (Blender and Rolling Stone both give generally positive reviews for Headbanger's Journey and the film itself has been played on VH1 Classic and Fuse), he's reliable. It's important that as editors we keep open minds and let out own opinions have effect on our decisions. RG (talk) 02:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)~
 * Don't try and patronise me. You think it's fine to write an article with dubious sources, knowing and openly admitting that it's factually incorrect, therefore rubbish, then try and preach open-mindedness and a neutral point of view, and try to cover it up as a small issue. Hilarious. If you know some of these bands aren't glam metal, why not try to find sources to say that they're not, and remove them from the list? Bretonbanquet (talk) 12:35, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I believe that this list is not rubbish and that it should at least try to be factually correct. As I stated above, I agree that some bands on the list are not glam metal at all, but I stick to sources. If you do find sources which clearly state these bands were not glam metal (I mean they openly state something like "they were/are not glam metal") and these are more than the ones which state they were, then the issue might be discussed. In this case there would be a clear conflict, so if you have them please provide them. FateForger (talk) 14:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, that's not the way to look at it. You don't regularly get sources that say "X is not a glam metal band", simply because there is very rarely any need to say so. However, a simple check on how a band is usually categorised should be sufficient. Slade, for example - a quick google search shows "glam rock" (a far more common term than glam metal) produces 50,500 hits, whereas glam metal produces 8610. T-Rex: glam rock 121,000 - glam metal 16,300. This list misrepresents these bands as they are usually seen. You can find a single source to say that black is white; maybe none to say "black is not white", but a zillion to say that black is black. It's about representing the majority view. Bretonbanquet (talk) 15:46, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Seriously dude? No one's trying to patronize you and please stay civil. Now to keep my argument short and to the point just read WP:RS, WP:Truth, and WP:NPOV. RG (talk) 16:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You're saying you're not patronising me, then you ask me to read that stuff? I've been around long enough to know that stuff back to front. Furthermore, don't tell me to stay civil when I've never even approached incivility. And among the hundreds of articles I've written, I've never written one knowing full well it was factually bankrupt. This list contains bands that are considered glam rock by 8-10 times more people than consider them "glam metal" yet you try to pass them off as such. Good luck with the FA nomination... Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:34, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Not to interrupt your discussion, but maybe someone can answer this: How can Marilyn Manson be glam metal, since they aren't metal at all, or are they? How are Placebo a glam metal band, they definitely aren't a metal band? The Donnas? not metal. (Though all of these bands use a lot of make-up, it's not the glam aesthetic their going for) I'm not really into glam, so I don't know.

Ozzy Osbourne
As far as I know, the only Ozzy album that critics label as Glam metal is "The Ultimate Sin". The inclusion of Zakk Wylde lead to a major change on the band’s sound for the following albums.--Rivet138 (talk) 02:17, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you, The Ultimate Sin album and tour was hair metal in both look and the sound of the songs off the album, so I added a specification of that era like others have done with Pantera, Kiss, Aerosmith, Alice Cooper ect. He still had the look during No Rest For The Wicked, but that was arguably his heaviest album and the subject matter also didn't match that of most hair metal bands. --RandyRhoadsRonnieDio (talk) 16:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Scorpions Hair Metal??
How can Scorpions be in this list? Scorpions was never a Glam Metal band, maybe some of their songs are but not the band.I searched all resources (including the one provided in the article), searched all albums sites in Wiki and in AllMusic. I tried to edit it to (some specific songs) It wont work for me. If anyone can provide a better source that will make my day — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.49.32.137 (talk) 09:27, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You can edit it. It is not protected in anyway.  It may be a problem on your end.Curb Chain (talk) 23:13, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Glam vs. Glam Metal
I've removed Slade, Sweet, and T. Rex. This is an encyclopedia; you're supposed to make the entries helpful for those who know very little about the subject. Including these bands in Glam Metal is confusing. It conflates Glam and Glam Metal. Are you suggesting there's no distinction? If you include those three bands, especially T. Rex, you might as well include David Bowie, Mott the Hoople, Mud, The Bay City Rollers, etc. If you want to include those three artists and more, you'd need to make a separate list of Glam artists, or "Glam Rock," so that the reader will know these artists influenced the later Glam Metal artists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.148.252.55 (talk) 18:17, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Totally agree.Curb Chain (talk) 00:34, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree. Sweet, Slade, T. Rex, David Bowie and Queen have NOTHING to do with glam metal. Yes, they influenced many glam metal bands, but mention as much as ONE song from thiese bands who are CLOSE to glam metal. Probably Big Brother by David Bowie can be said to have some elements of the genre, and Blockbuster and Hell Raiser by Sweet and some of Slade's later stuff. But none of these can be considered "glam metal". Firstly, they were long before glam metal even existed. Also, they are still closer to glam rock than to glam metal. I think the source that was added for the claim was either a typo error or a mistake. At least, very few would call any of these "glam metal". Sweet, Slade, T.Rex, Bowie and Queen were glam ROCK, not METAL. I will remove it now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Te og kaker (talk • contribs) 10:34, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

1971?
what band was glam metal in 1971??--75.65.123.86 (talk) 11:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * No bands were. It's just that the one who wrote the list obviously has no idea was glam metal is! Most of the big glam rock bands - Mud, Sweet, Slade, T.Rex, Queen - have been added. And they had nothing to do with glam metal at all!!! --Te og kaker (talk) 11:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Lita Ford?
Is there any reason Lita Ford isn't listed here?BDR77777 (talk) 22:45, 4 April 2014 (UTC)BDR77777
 * Nevermind, I went ahead and added her and Vince Neil (for his solo career). BDR77777 (talk) 18:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)BDR77777

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on List of glam metal bands and artists. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140306012120/http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/arts/music/20toki.htmlsql=11:difuxqr5ldse to http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/arts/music/20toki.htmlsql=11:difuxqr5ldse

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Scorpions
If I find enough sources that say the scorpions are glam metal, can I add them to the list? SleazeballJoel (talk) 21:33, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Guns N Roses
For years it has been known by many that Guns N Roses was established as an alternative to glam metal, not as yet another glam metal band. The Mo-Ja&#39;al (talk) 02:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

People repeatedly deleting Alice N Chains
We need to find a solution to get people to stop deleting them Category adder (talk) 01:49, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Effectivement Alice N Chains a de nouveau disparu de la liste. Je ne comprends pas pourquoi. Alice N Chain était bien un groupe de Glam Metal. Puis ils sont devenus Alice IN Chain et ont changés de registre. Ceux qui suppriment Alice N Chain ont sans doute un manque de culture musicale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB10:82E3:3C00:E9C3:30B9:8AAB:78D8 (talk) 08:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Fixing up the list
I just want to let everybody know that I’m going to try to fix up this list. Category adder (talk) 20:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Should Stolen Prayer and Temple Balls be on the list?
These are both bands that appeared in the last five years or so and and I think they fit into this list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Styxtar (talk • contribs) 07:44, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Not displaying properly
Sections J-S are not showing on this page. Needs editing. 46.65.29.114 (talk) 14:43, 17 June 2022 (UTC)