Talk:Godsmack/Archive 1

message: When you say grammy-nominated in the intro you dont need to remind people again that they're grammy nominees in the same paragraph.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Blizzard King (talk • contribs) 22:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Grammy

message: I just read the intro again and the idiot used the word "and" two times in one sentence(run on sentence idiot). I'm changing alot of the intro.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Blizzard King (talk • contribs) 22:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Go back to school idiots

message: The begining is misleading, when I read it I thought they had real hits not moder rock hits so Im changing it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Blizzard King (talk • contribs) 22:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No Hit Wonder

message: This article is written like crap and needs a huge revision.
       Then why don't you start it up, heathen.
: Good to see someone's paying attention _> MonstaPro:Talk 18:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a wikiproject for just for bands regardless of genre?  It would help with articles like this and provide guidelines for the basic structure of a band article.  Following the example of Wikiproject:Films might be a good place to start.  MrMurph101 01:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NEEDS EDITING

message: Okay...Godsmack is not a heavy metal band. bob craven sucks 23:09, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
:Who says?
::I beg to differ. Godsmack's guitar styles are very reminiscent of classic heavy metal, and the lead singer's style is much more of a metal style of singing then alternative rock, at least in my opinion. VH1 list's Godsmack as an alternative metal band, and i think that is what we should go with. The link is right on the page. Sarcastic Avenger 22:47, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre classification: Heavy metal band or not?

message: Elton John and Elvis Presley are believed to be the primary influence upon Godsmack...
since when does godsmack's music sound anything like them?!!  i thought the primary influence was Alice in chains. Itachi1452 01:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WTF?!!!

message: On the controversy regarding 'Alice In Chains' instead of reading like this:
"It came from the lead singer insulting one of his band mates for having a cold sore on his lip."
the word 'allegedly' should be added:
"It allegedly came from the lead singer insulting one of his band mates for having a cold sore on his lip."
This way the article can become even more neutral, because both arguments have equal credibility and should be presented as sides and not necesarily facts since neither can be verified
Speaking of Neutrality, should we really describe guitar solos as "Mind-Blowing" and guitarists as "Amazing?"
*In an interview in Los Angeles based radio station KROQ, Sully confirmed the cold sore issue.  Sully made fun one of the members for having a cold sore and ended up getting one himself.  He callled this "Godsmack."  Kind of like Karma.  MrMurph101 18:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All of this Alice in Chains & Godsmack stuff is a bunch of crap. Both of the bands are amazing but this crap has just gone to far. EX: Facelift - Faceless that's friggen dumb that that is compared. Either this stuff gets sourced and moved to a page of its own entitled "Godsmack and Alice in Chains Compairisons" or it will get deleted for not being sourced. And I'm not finding sources because I find it all stupid. Robbie admited in the video "Smack This" that they stole it from the Alice in Chains song God Smack. If this stuff isn't sourced within a week I am deleting it for not being sourced. Skeeker [Talk] 20:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it is really just OR. All that needs to be said is that Alice in Chains was one of their influences.  No need to make all those subjective comparisons.  MrMurph101 02:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Alice in Chains & "the Godsmack"

message: As a long-time listener of their hometown station WAAF, I remember frequently hearing advertisements of "Alice in Chains cover band Godsmack" concerts before they started recording their own music.  In the tradition of The Machine, Physical Graffiti, Draw the Line and The Joshua Tree they named themselves after an aspect of the band they covered.
Unfortunately I don't have anything in the way of citations, so this wouldn't be appropriate to include in the main article.  Perhaps others could find some? Ubermonkey 00:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It can be included.  Usually a citation is needed if something is disputed although it is always recommended.  The comparisons to Alice in Chains should have its own section though and make the top part of the article an introduction, followed by the history of the band, like what most other band articles are like.  MrMurph101 00:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover band 

message: I came to this article to learn more about Godsmack, and somehow all I know now is that they may have derived some parts of themselves from Alice in Chains, in my opinion that should be a small part of the article, perhaps even a section, but it definitely shouldn't start off with that. It's a very biased, poor quality article in my opinion. Avuton 20:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an overemphasis on Alice in Chains comparisons in the intro which can be perceived as biased.  I agree with putting the comparisons to them in a seciton with a sentence in the intro that addresses it with a "see below" guiding readers to the substance of the content on that issue. MrMurph101 22:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased article (POV issues) 

message: Remember when Godsmack was first touring, they used to have a big pentacle flag in the background of the band. There is no discussion on the question of Sully's beliefs. I think he was into Wicca, but I don't remember. Regardless, there should be something about it here since it had to do with the band.
:Sully has his own article which discusses his beliefs.  It would still be good to maybe include how his beliefs are incorporated in Godsmack's music for this article though. MrMurph101 22:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sully is a Celtic Witch, but someone keeps deleting the religion bit off his webpage. BMan1113VR 04:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the Wicca? 

message: Okay firstly, Godsmack are not heavy metal; not every damn band with a "heavy" guitar tone doesn't make them metal, it's the way they play their music that makes them metal or not.  Their music has more to do with grunge and hard rock than actual heavy metal.
Now my real discussion: Godsmack's "Time Bomb" from their debut album has been said to rip off a main riff that Nine Inch Nails used on their song "Last" from their album "Broken".  If you listen to both songs, they sound very distinctivly alike.  NIN released their song around 1992 or sometime around then while Godsmack released their song around 1997.  Would this be or should it be necessary to include in the article, regardless if it's true or not?  I think it'd be interesting to show.
:I'm indifferent to whether Godsmack is considered "Heavy Metal" or not or whatever label you want.  They are all subjective.  They have been labeled by outside sources as metal so it's not wrong to put that label in.  If you do not believe their metal you are entitled to that opinion but just leave it in since that label can be verified.  As to the NIN, you just have to find whether or not Trent Reznor is doing anything about it.  MrMurph101 02:34, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but your personal opinion has no more credibility than anyone elses, the "Heavy Metal" label should stay.  Whatever label has been attributed to them should stay in the infobox.  Trying to delete what you don't agree with is just nit picky.  MrMurph101 19:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Musical influences: Godsmack vs. Nine Inch Nails

message: does anyone think they should change this ? i really don't consider godsmack to be nu metal to be honest. what do you guys think ?
*I don't see how they're simlar to any Nu-Metal bands (Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit, Korn,etc).Jason f90 04:25, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre classification: nu metal? 

message: I realize it may be the wrong area to put this question, but there is no article for their song The Enemy. What instruments are used to make the loud sound that is heard in the intro and throughout most of the song? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.69.91.194 (talk) 05:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Song info: The Enemy 

message: Links were dead. Demantos 19:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted Reviews Section

message: Deleted because it was completely POV. Demantos 19:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparisons Section

message: Under History:
In February 1995 Sully Erna decided to start a new band as a lead singer after being behind the drums for more than 23 years in his previous band
WTF?! I bothered to check the reference and it says Sully appeared on ONE LP. Check your facts & change it... _> MonstaPro:Talk 18:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, common sense here.  Godsmack - founded 1995.  23 years playing drums before Godsmack formation.  Sully born in 1968.  Makes him 26, 27 when Godsmack forms, right?  Yes, so...either he's been playing in bands since he was 3/4, or that whole line is ... Shatterzer0 07:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History, specifically Sully's 

message: I made a DVD section which seems to be deleted, anyone know why? As i'm trying to improve this article let my stuff is being deleted--Will Scot 55 04:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections getting deleted 

message: I made a substantial edit to this article yesterday.  An SPA editor Godsamick and an anonymous editor (presumably the same person) have reverted those edits.  Such edits worth retaining include:
* Misspellings and poor grammar like "grammy nominated", "Heavy metal" (followed immediately by "hard rock"), "got in the studio", and the use of "you" (in a formal encyclopedia article)
* Wikifying of years, in opposition to WP:CONTEXT
* Removal of wikifying of full dates, in opposition to WP:CONTEXT
* Persistent misuse of quotation marks around songs instead of italicizing them
* Refusal to credit Erna as a vocalist (instead, he only writes the lyrics; this apparently is a band with only backing vocalists)
* Unnecessary hard returns from where material was sloppily cut-and-paste into the article
* An entire unsourced section of original research comparing the band to Alice in Chains
* Removal of an  template from the unreferenced History section
* Retention of one-line paragraphs
* Retention of a link to an interview in the "External links" section that should, at best, be used as a reference; it's more likely just link spam
Justify your reversions of these well-intentioned and absolutely necessary edits.  As it stands with your reversions, this article is in very bad shape.  My edits were a first attempt to clean this article up and make it something close to a coherent encyclopedia article.  If there is specific material that I removed or changed to which you object, voice your objections without reverting and readding all of the problems outlined above (and many not specifically outlined).  --ElKevbo 04:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No response?  --ElKevbo 00:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversions by Godsamick and 24.187.101.85

message: :Image:Faceless cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Faceless cover.jpg

message: :Image:Godsmack-Godsmack (album cover).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 17:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Godsmack-Godsmack (album cover).jpg

message: :Image:Godsmack - Awake.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 17:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Godsmack - Awake.jpg

message: I'm a massive Godsmack fan and though this page could do with some stuff added so this is what I done i've added many References, made a Discography section and added there upcoming Box set, I also re-added the DVD's as well as the soundtracks the band has appeared on, and I changed Tribute to VH1 Rock Honors as well as adding text here and there to fill it out more
What does everyone think, as i'm new to wiki which is why the links in the references section don't look that great! so comments are welcom, Thanks --Will Scot 55 07:04, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does the page look, with my edits? 

message: the new metallica? okay some one needs to stop reading hit parader. has anyone even listened to metallica here? geez...
:well the metllica thing is gone now. i'll have to agree with you on this one. it was biased and obviously put there by a fan of the band, not some one who wanted to better the article. this is why children need to stay off wikipedia and leave it for the grown ups to edit. and for the record, not once have i heard godsmack being called "the next metallica". Crownofworms 19:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: lame

message: Demantos 18:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added some and fixed others. Skeeker [Talk] 22:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fixed references

message: The comparison to Alice in Chains has been removed from the introduction; which is good, as it was unprofessional and biased to have that in the introduction of the article. However, some users insist on removing and/or shrinking the AiC comparison section - this is wrong and biased. I have re-added the bulk of the comparison section, but under a new title, "Influences". If any one can add other influences to Godsmack, then please write about it in this section. But do not remove this section as it currently presents both sides of the Godsmack/Alice in Chains story. Oh yeah, and if anyone accuses me of re-adding this section because I hate Godsmack and love Alice in Chains, they are sadly mistaken, as I own Godsmack, Awake, The Other Side, and IV. - Alice Mudgarden 07:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The AiC comparison