# Talk:The Chariot (band)

The genres had The Chaiot listed as mathcore. That's Norma Jean. I removed that descrption and included Noise-core, and Stop-n-go metal as the genres.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.79.54.130 (talk) 19:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC) 

Can someone mark all the citations needed for this article? I would be more than happy to do the research for them.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lorenwade (talk • contribs) 05:34, 26 July 2008 (UTC) 

This article reads like the front page of a fan magazine. I personally can't fix it because I hate this band and was just looking on the site to see if the band was a joke or not. Trendkill 22:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

to quote Josh Scogin from several interviews, "I just consider the band to be a heavy hardcore punk band." They state themselves that they "are not really a metal band, some people call us metal but when we play with real metal bands we stick out like a sore thumb." They call their shows punk shows, they call themselves "punk rock kids who got into heavier music," make no mistake The Chariot is a Hardcore band, you might get away with Metallic Hardcore, but they are still a Hardcore band in the same way that Converge is a Hardcore band. And who keeps changing the page to call them a "Christian Metal" band, It's already been shown they're not metal and although the band is comprised of Christians the lyrics can be interpreted many different ways.

Obvious advertisement, with a MySpace link to a band they toured with.. certainly does NOT belong in the intro. 24.61.84.44 03:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

 ==See also== 

List of songs with particularly long titles
- Gbeeker 01:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the album Everything Is Alive, Everything Is Breathing, Nothing Is Dead, and Nothing Is Bleeding, but the main article doesnt warrent it. Dan, the CowMan 02:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Done! Gbeeker 22:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

how come the picture has 5 people in it, but it only lists 4 people being in the band?
Supmyman7 02:57, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

No way man,remove that.Whoever warranted this stub as PR needs to get that off,or look up the genre.
'thought' is spelt wrong and despite my agreement that whole paragraph reeks of fanboy.

I'm very concerned about the bias of this article. It is not an encyclopedic entry at all but rather a direct copy of information released by the band, in short, this is a press release.Hopesrise 00:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I'v cleaned up the 'history' section, I hope it is to everyone's approval.Hopesrise 00:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is the voice saying at the end of "Someday, In the Event That Mankind Actually Figures Out What it is That This World Revolves Around, Thouands of People are Going to be Shocked and Perplexed To Find out that it Was not Them, Sometimes This Includes Me"?
It says "I'm not worried about death" with a strong accent on 'death'. I think I saw that text in an ecard with the sound clip or something like that.

I want to edit the line "as well as being thought to be one of the heaviest Christian metal bands to date" because that is very untrue.
There are many heavier bands than The Chariot.
They're not even that 'heavy', more chaotic.

I'm going to change the word heavy to chaotic.

I wouldn't say either, I think personal ideas of what is heavy and chaotic should be left out. 64.234.34.248 (talk) 13:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

'The Chariot' should either directly lead to the tarot card, or a disambiguation page, as opposed to this obscure Christian band. One is certainly more relevant than the other. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.16.18.99 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC).
To the person above me,
You are an idiot. That is just a stupid card in a deck for a card game. Am i saying card games are stupid? No, i play card games all the time. But should every single card have a page...NO. A tarot card doesn't deserve a page because...hmmm....IT ISNT REAL. The Chariot is a real group of people making a living and that is just a stupid card.
The chariot is not obscure because they have tons of loyal listeners. The more relevant one is an band that has influences to god and their faiths, not some stupid card. The page should not have been changed. End of story.
Signed,
EVERYONE [unknown]

Speak for yourself. Thank you. SweetNightmares (talk) 01:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
The Chariot is not an obscure band.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.183.205 (talk) 20:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC) 

The Chariot has met notability guidelines, surpassed them, and are actually living people. Whether or not you believe in... tarot cards... or not, is irrelevant. 64.234.34.248 (talk) 13:25, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I have a copy of Tooth and Nail/Solid State's compilation mix called "This Is Solid State Vol. 5"  which features a track by the Chariot I've never heard elsewhere before. It's track number 9 and it's called "It's Usually The Boys Who Cry Wolf That Grow Up To Be The Men Who Cry Sanctuary", I'm not sure if that song changed into another song when the first album debuted. I can't find anything about it on line, not even lyrics, so does anybody have any clues about it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.52.66.6 (talk) 02:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC).
This is an early version of Yellow Dress Locked Knees  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.238.94.171 (talk) 19:29, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 

Something should be said about the Chariot's first DVD (released prior to Everything is Alive, in 2004), which I just can't remember the name of right now. Anyway, I think the DVD, due to its long and hilarious content as well as its display of the Chariot's live shows, developed a pretty expansive cult following. Not sure, though. I know it was a popular item and I was asked more than once, "Dude, have you seen the Chariot DVD?" Notkc 22:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I also threw in a little bit about "Everything is Alive..." in the first paragraph. Not having the album listed in the introductory paragraph makes the History section a little confusing.
Notkc 22:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Where's the Nirvana sample in "The Deaf Policeman"?
I've never heard "Tourette's", but it seems uncharacteristic for a metal band to use samples, and none of it sounds sampled, or even, particularly, like Nirvana.
Mr bouregaurd 03:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=tourettes+nirvana&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#
About 30 seconds into the song, it plays a particular riff, which can be heard starting at 00:54 in "The Deaf Policeman". The song has vaguely similar chord progressions which come from "Tourette's" as well.
NickVisel (talk) 01:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree. The riff is not a sample, however, it is just copied.68.225.166.76 (talk) 21:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

No it's not... And that's not what he was saying. The riff is a simple one, yes, but I wouldn't say copied. I would say it's more of nudge to Nirvana. 64.234.34.248 (talk) 13:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

In the infobox, there is some text where a photo is supposed to be, but it's not showing up. I don't really know how to remove the text that is the IMG:200 stuff, but I can delete the caption, since it is a caption of a picture that just isn't there. If anyone knows how to remove the rest of the text, that would be nice. Thank you. BTC 20:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

This band is anything but Metalcore. Listen to their songs! Bands like As I Lay Dying are metalcore... This band is Noisecore with Mathcore influences. Listen to the rifts. Not metalcore at all. They use beats (Beat_(acoustics)) and use Audio feedback alot, making them Noisecore, and complex time signatures, which is influenced by Mathcore.68.225.166.76 (talk) 21:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Sources must be used to clarify this. Noisecore, I wouldn't say personally, but Mathcore yes. We must not use preference, though, to clarify genres. You may think it is Noisecore, but with genre it is best to find some source that states this. A reliable source, not a blog or whatnot. "Listen to their songs" is not a source, either. 64.234.34.248 (talk) 13:19, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

The Chariot is a self-proclaimed Christian metal band: see the last paragraph of the musical style section. They are not hardcore punk; they sound nothing like Black Flag or Dead Kennedys. And they are not post-hardcore; they sound nothing like Fugazi, Jawbox, Quicksand, etc. -- Noj r (talk) 01:41, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Check the subpage at the top of the page :-)
I'll be working on more issues throughout a couple of days. Xavexgoem (talk) 02:07, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Chariot (band)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hey, it's been a while since I've reviewed a good-article nominee. What I see is very good, though :-)

Some preamble

Well-written - Pass;
Factually accurate - Pass;
Broad - Pass;
Neutral - Pass;
Stable - Pass;
Images - Pass

One thing in the lede, prose-wise:
"The band has been privy to frequent lineup changes."
privy means "allowed to know a secret". You might do some byte-killing and just go for "The band has had frequent lineup changes.", perhaps with a quick note on why the members keep changing.

the quotes "legendary" and "destructive" do not have sources. They need sources, as they're direct quotes. The trick will be to keep the lede from being cluttered with citations, so I suggest moving down to Musical Style.
Reviewer: Xavexgoem (talk) 02:07, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I made the changes you have suggested. I cannot speculate on why the band has frequent lineup changes, however; there are no references explaining it. Thanks, -- Noj r (talk) 02:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
I've passed it. Grats, Xavexgoem (talk) 20:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Solid State is their label, so any references to Solid State publications are primary sources. Those should be replaced if possible. LaMona (talk) 21:43, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Chariot (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6JAsSO2tf?url=http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/the-chariot-new-video-interview-available-seven-inch-single-detailed to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=153108
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:22, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

This GA's reference section is a trainwreck. I should not have to navigate to separate sections to see full details of a reference's contents. A last name in the body's inline citation is utterly insufficient and unclear for a web reference. I know "Apar" is a Loudwire staffer from expereince, but to see that by itself simply is not sufficiently accessible. It's okay to have a different citation style than the majority of articles use, but it should be consistent and clear. I see other references that have since been added and have fully expanded references as most other articles would, but the current status of the section will leave most readers, including myself, confused. In conclusion, I have thus added {{citation style}} to the top of the article. There was another, much older cleanup banner which I'm surprised never drew GAR's attention, but I do not think it is an issue of critical importance.
I'd start fixing this myself, but I am invested elsewhere at the moment, so I'm hoping the cleanup banner brings the attention of someone who knows how to fix it. If anyone decides this absolutely must be taken to GAR, please drop me a line. mftp dan  oops  16:50, 12 February 2025 (UTC)