Talk:Evanescence/Archive 5

message: Anyone know anything about the upcoming album Justice?  In fact, is this actually an Evanescence album at all?  I've seen a ton of torrents for the demos of Justice, and it does sound like the band.  However, I can't find anything official that another album is even coming out.  Rather than going willy nilly and making changes to the article, I figured I'd post the info here and let the regular contributors make any actual changes.  --Brownings 10:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've had a look and i dont think this is an ev album. it is highly unlikely due to the fact they are on tour plus there are no references for the album --Childzy ¤ Talk 10:48, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

text: This is most definitely not an actual Evanescence album.  Only found on bittorrent networks as far as I can tell, no information from the band itself, simple rehash of previously released or demo songs.  Download it if you want, but from what I can tell, there is nothing new here. -- Huntster T • @ • C 07:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Justice

message: I beleive Evanescence is Hard Rock. The reson why i belive they are this genre is because of the low guitar tunings and their "style" is like a lot of other Hard Rock bands.
Nardulli22 02:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At least they won Best New Artist and Best Hard Rock Performance at the 2004 Grammy Awards. --AI 01:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hard Rock 

message: I just noticed now the request not to edit genres, however there is no indication of where to look.  I am hereby justifying my edit (once I correct the pipe into a line-break).  Allmusic.com lists specifically the term "Alternative metal" as well as "Goth metal" and at least one album is listed on discogs.com as "Nu metal".  The term 'metal' has pretty much constantly been associated with this band as far as I can tell.  - BalthCat 22:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Really doesn't matter to me what they're listed as.  The only thing I care about is that there is an agreement on here BEFORE the change is made.  --Brownings 22:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I suggest you seek first to foster an attitude in others which promotes the search for consensus rather than labelling justifiable edits vandalism.  I sourced my change, I'll find more if i have to.  "Alt rock" is a woefully inadequate genre tag for this modern band. - BalthCat 22:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Look through the history, you'll see this is an on going problem.  I say talk it out before you change, and you change it anyway.    I'm sorry, but is something not clear there?  --Brownings 22:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My point was that perhaps you should try saying that in your rv comments, not "vandalism", and if there's more than one change you want to make, and one is vandalism, mention it.  My edit, and the one before are still not vandalism.  I'm sure it's an ongoing problem because "Alt rock" is laughably inadequate.  I'm going to go spend time now finding sources that aren't "hardcore metalfan" forums calling Evanescence "not metal" or "alt rock" for that matter... - BalthCat 22:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Have you got some reliable sources to back up the change, by any chance?  AngelOfSadness  talk  21:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

text: When the band itself does not consider their music goth rock, I'd suggest that labeling them as such would be inappropriate. -- Huntster T • @ • C 07:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

text: As always, the problem is finding a source which uses this specific terminology.  I'd recommend against this as it seems even more focused a genre than the other suggestions here. — Huntster (talk • email • contribs) 05:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genres 

message: the link for the official Sony-Australian Evanescence site is gone, someone add it back. 
http://www.sonybmg.com.au/artist/info.do?artistId=15558  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.238.212.50 (talk) 06:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official Links 

message: I've just visited this page and the Discography and Reference sections are missing. Anyone else experiencing this or is it just me?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by F257 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it wasn't. There was some sort of an error in a recent edit; I just reverted it to restore the missing sections. --SilentAria talk 14:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography 

message: Muse, Radiohead, RHCP, Green Day, are all considered alternative rock, yet Evanescence doesn't even sound like any of them.  I'm pretty sure they've been labeled as alternative metal and nu metal.  Just look over the internet...it's there!!!Maplejet (talk) 02:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alternative metal, gothic rock, post-grunge, post-rock etc. are all styles Evanescence have been labelled, according to many, many sites on the internet, and all of them are sub genres/fusion genres of alternative rock, if you look at alternative rock article. The Evanescence article says alternative rock, and not a huge list of genres, simply to prevent lame edit wars over genre by covering most of the styles, they are said to have incorperated into their music, in two words. If we were to inlcude every single genre the band has been labled over the years, the list would make the infobox go off the page. The article mentions alternative rock as it covers a vast amount of genres the band have been labled but the band may not agree with. For example it doesn't say gothic rock because Amy Lee has said in a few interviews that she doesn't consider the band's music as gothic and yet gothic rock is a subgenre of alternative rock. Also it's very hard to find suitable sources to back up genres as sources from mechandise websites/fansites aren't considered reliable. Sure even though the bands myspace mentions alternative and rock, it also mentions pop. I'm sure if pop was put into the infobox, chances are many people would disagree with it and remove it from the article even though the official myspace states this. If the band have said they are alternative metal/nu metal in an interview that can be used as a reference, then go ahead and add it to the article but if there aren't any suitable sources, that are reliable and can be used in the article, then the content can't really be added.  AngelOfSadness  talk  15:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We know. If you find any official site that says so, cite it. Armando.Otalk • Ev 20:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree, a band like evanescence shouldn't just be described as alternative rock, post-grunge and alternative metal have to be added and infact if there's going to be one genre it should be alternative metal not rock.--Brickovic (talk) 14:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But the problem is trying to find an official site that says they are alternative metal that can be used as a reference. I you find a few sources citing alternative metal but are unsure if they are suitable, link them here so the links can be discussed and hopefully they will be suitable to add to the article.  AngelOfSadness  talk  18:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  You just can't simply call Evanescence alternative rock!! 

message: Their lyrics DO contain Christian values, but let's end this once and for all: Is Evanescence a Christian band or not? They may not be Christian rock, but they can still be Christian.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.171.209.15 (talk) 16:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Evanescence is not a Christian band per the band members' own words. See the numerous citations within the "Labeling controversy" section. -- Huntster T • @ • C 17:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Just because some lyrics may have Christian values also doesn't necessarily mean it's derived from Christianity. Many Christian values overlap with other religion's values and philosophies.Jackster (talk) 19:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Christian band?

message: only an idiot would think they were antythin short of some kind of metal. Comeon alt panic at the disco and fallout boy are alt . not evnescence. 
I'll tell you who made it say alt. somebody who dos'ent even like the band and who could not fro some reason admit they were Goth-Metal —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xion infinity (talk • contribs) 17:29, 25 November 2007
:First thing, many people have said they are metal yet no-one can come up with a reliable source that states such. Second thing, the band's official MySpace describes their genre as " Alternative, Rock and Pop". Third thing, Amy Lee doesn't think they are gothic at all.  - which has been said repeatedly by herself in many interviews. A lot of the times, if reliable sources can't be found about genre,  whatever the band thinks which genre they belong to, is what goes in the infobox.  AngelOfSadness  talk  22:45, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe metal, but gothic????? I know that Ev sound and look gothic but Amy has that they're not. Armando.Otalk • Ev 01:50, 26 November 2007 
Why not alt. metal? I Am The Master Of All Thunder (talk) 09:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Allmusic lists alternative metal, and I'm sure I've seen them described as such elsewhere. They're not really an alternative rock band; their musical traits are more in line with alternative/nu metal. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  genre ??? 

message: I am the webmaster for Evanescence's first site and thought an apology from me was in order regarding the controversy I regret adding to in 2003 when I pulled their page after Amy Lee's comments. I have posted an apology to the band at this link. I don't know if it's possible to add a link to my apology to the body of the main article, but if it seems pertinent enough, please consider including it. - 166.128.184.235 (talk) 12:27, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for posting this, hopefully it will get back to the band some way.  However, it just isn't within our purview to include links like this; we have to limit the scope of coverage to a certain point, and I think making that be just the band, label and retailer angles is the best option. -- Huntster T • @ • C 16:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apology from Evanescence's old webmaster concerning 2003 controversy 

message: Just nominated for "Best Hard Rock Performance" for Sweet Sacrifice. Should it be mentioned in the article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.173.79 (talk) 21:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2008 Grammy Nomination 

message: where is it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.236.247 (talk) 21:35, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean?  If you are referring to the footer template, it was deleted today by another editor (along with numerous sections) for unknown reasons.  I've since restored it. -- Huntster T • @ • C 21:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template 

message: Okay, someone keeps changing their genre to Alternative Rock. They are not Alternative Rock at all! More like Alternative Metal and Hard Rock. To say that Evanescence is an Alternative Rock is misleading. I've checked a lot of sites about the bands genre and none of them mention Alternative Rock.  Alternative Metal and even Gothic Rock, Gothic Metal and Nu Metal has been mentioned. And they sound like Hard Rock. Therefor, this is pretty absurd, so I changed the genres whether you like it or not! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.0.147 (talk)  15 December 2007
:The guest who made this topic was actually me. I had problems staying logged in, but I got it figured out now. Sorry if I sounded a bit angry. Anyway, I would like a reply. How about we just add a "Debate Genre" section then?--RikkuLover (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 06:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genres 

message: So has there been any interest in trying to get this through FAC since the last try? Gimmetrow 07:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've improved the lead. I think that was the 'bigggest' problem pointed in that FAC discussion. I think there are not other problems, so maybe she should nominate it again. Armando.Otalk Ev 3K 03:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support the article for another run at FAC.  I think it's in pretty good shape, and better than 60% of the ones that make FA status.  Is there anything we need to tighten up before nomination?  --Brownings (talk) 01:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check this review. Armando.Otalk Ev 3K 14:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

text:  Links in references #4 and #10 are broken. Lead is still a bit "short", and the paragraphs in lineup change should vary structure. If you want a copy-check before FAC drop me a note. Gimmetrow 07:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article could benefit from some discussion of recurring themes. This was mentioned in the old FAC and again in the Bio PR. Gimmetrow 21:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAC 

message: Does anyone know 1) what exactly Le Nouveau Gothique is and 2) why it's not listed? I've seen it many places online, but nowhere official -is it just an album put together by fans or what? If so it does seem that Evanescence has  an awful lot of fan-made mixes online - would that fact in itself deserve a mention? StarManta (talk) 19:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Le Nouveau Gothique is a fan compilation that received wide circulation on filesharing networks and has been sold in less-than-reputable venues as an official album.  It is not official nor authorized in any way by the band or label.  While there are several compilations circulating (Le Nouveau Gothique, Not For Your Ears, and Ultra Rare Trax are by far the most widespread), this is not that significant a thing...most popular bands have this type of occurrence. Not to mention, while we know that they exist, there are no reliable publications that have published anything against them.  Non-notable, technically unverifiable through acceptable means, thus no inclusion here.  Anyway, these things are like viruses and really shouldn't receive any sort of attention, certainly not what Wikipedia might bring them. -- Huntster T • @ • C 21:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's it, Le Nouveau Gothique is just a well-known fake album. Armando.Otalk Ev 3K 01:38, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Le Nouveau Gothique? 

message: i've been listening to evanescence a lot lately. i think they are gothic rock and gothic metal. any one agree or disagree? Lpfan4eva1990 (talk) 01:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh man, are you ever beating a dead horse.  This place sees more reverts than you can shake a stick at, and 99.99% of them are because of changes to the genre listing.  Evanescence is just one of those bands that this debate will never be dead.  --Brownings (talk) 02:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some articles for bands have a "Debated Genre" section. How about we just add that for this article too? --RikkuLover (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 06:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you find sources detailing any such debate?  If not, then it becomes original research.  The basic problem here is that Evanescence has so many different styles of music that it becomes extremely cumbersome trying to list them all, not to mention breaks policy since we don't have sources for which songs are considered to be in what genre, etc.  So we compromise by going back to a basic, generic genre, "alt. rock".  No one really likes it, but it is more appropriate than the alternatives...unless you'd rather see the even more vague "rock" in its place! — Huntster (talk • email • contribs) 15:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for the late reply, but I think Hard Rock would be a better generic genre to list this band as than Alternative Rock. Can't we just list genres as long as we find sources though? --RikkuLover (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 02:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

text: What is the even more vague "rock"?Lpfan4eva1990 (talk) 20:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite sure what you are asking, but I was alluding to the genre "rock" being even less specific than "alt. rock". — Huntster (talk • email • contribs) 20:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. Well we all believe what we believe, i believe they're gothic rock and gothic metal. Lpfan4eva1990 (talk) 20:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Alright Lpfan4eva1990 (talk) 20:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

text: So you're saying that everyone has a different opinion on Evanescence's genre of music? Lpfan4eva1990 (talk) 15:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gothic Metal? Please, go listen to Lacuna Coil or Cradle of Filth, and tell me if you still think their Gothic Metal.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.142.218 (talk) 06:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Amy has said their not gothic. So...if they are not alt rock..maybe alt metal....i dunno... Armando.Otalk Ev 3K 20:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree, Evanescence seems to encompass a lot of genres, and I'm probably one of those annoying metalhead who don't want to accept that Evanescence is metal, but I really truly don't think they are.  Gothic metal bands are bands like Elis, Forever Slave, Sirenia, Silentium, Trail of Tears and Draconian, which if you listen to them, sound very different from Evanescence. Most of them use 'death grunt' which Evanescence doesn't. Evanescece certainly has the 'goth' part down but gothic metal is a genre, not a style.  I think that some of their songs are gothic metal, but I think the majority of them are gothic rock, or some other genre. Megatherium135 (talk) 01:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gothic Rock/Gothic Metal 

message: On 'The Open Door' article its says thier tour finished on the 8th and on the Evanescence main it says they finished on the 9th, which one is it???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.238.18.233 (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've modified The Open Door article to read the 9th; the source article was written by Amy herself on the 9th, and she mentions "This last day of tour is of course a happy day...." Perhaps the last concert was on the 8th, but the 9th was for wrapping up? I don't know, but that's the source we have at hand. — Huntster (talk • email • contribs) 02:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistakes 

message: With the number of vandal attacks on this article, I feel it's time to request a semi-protect status for the page.  Evanesence gets a good half a dozen reverts per day for randomly added information.  Anyone feel it's time to put at least the non-reg vandals to bed for awhile?  --Brownings (talk) 22:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I felt that long time ago, but no one gave a .... about what I said. Yeah, it must annoying to users like Huntster to be reverting a lot of dumb edits by unreg users. This article MUST be semi-protected. Armando.Otalk Ev 3K 03:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm with you, and I'm sure Hunster would definitely support it.  Any idea on how we go about requesting the protection?  --Brownings (talk) 03:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: While I would indeed support semi-protection, there is little chance that the article would be protected.  Typically, protection is only afforded when there is wholesale vandalism being performed.  In this case, there is little vandalism, just people who don't take the time to read inline notes and the talk page (genre changes) and people who insert personal notes (EVANESCENCE ROCKS!!!11one1!).  However, if you wish to file a request for protection, just head over to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection and follow the instructions.  Just remember that you'll have to make a convincing case, since page protection is considered the last available option. — Huntster (talk • email • contribs) 19:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Huntster's right, this article usually doesn't get enough vandalism to justify semi-protection. Gimmetrow 21:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-Protect

message: The history part, which includes the various releases under their own heading, proceeds along chronologically. Let's place the "Lineup Changes" section into the fold between "Fallen" and the following section because that next section starts "After they changed personnel . . . " (not verbatim) I think we could strengthen the article by cutting that section up and placing certain parts into what's already been written. Gimme your thoughts.  Thanks Fdssdf (talk) 05:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I should all be one history, and not the history of the albums/tours apart of the lineup changes. Armando.Otalk Ev 3K 17:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you merge the lineup changes with the other text, you're welcome to reverse whatever changes I made to the text in that section. I think the prose here is crisp, and I only edited it to vary the phrasing a little. Gimmetrow 08:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lineup Changes section