Talk:Motörhead/Archive 1

message: Yes, I know they're not a heavy metal band, but they are percieved as such by a lot of people. There have been numerous discussions about this, but until some final conclusion is made, lets leave it at heavy metal. Roda 19:52, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, leave it as Metal. Just who are the gods who decree what is metal or not? For arguments sake, how come Motorhead appear on every "Metal" compilation ever produced (usually Ace Of Spades) and every documentary about Heavy Metal ever produced has an interview with Lemmy? I've always classed it as Heavy Metal, maybe out of convenience, because Hard Rock is so broad. I mean, it could be Slade ffs! As for Lemmy saying they are "just rock n' roll" - he probably learnt from an early age not to enter into any pointless arguments about genre which, at the end of the day, does not matter. 193.238.233.2 14:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Although I try to steer away from comments about Motorhead's genre (a whole supermarket of worm cans), it is interesting to note that I went into the loft the other day and retrieved a video from 1990 called Hard N' Heavy – it was a Thrash Metal Special and contained... guess who? Yes, Motorhead! Make of that what you will. Bubba hotep 12:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre 

message: AC/DC referred to Motörhead as,"the only band louder than us". 
It just doesn't seem like it belongs here.  Not gonna just nix it, because certainly its verity holds a certain amount of weight, and should not be dismissed lightly.  Would have posed this to the discussion page before removing it from the article, but since there was not yet a discussion page for this article I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that no one's going to give too much of a fuck.  Discuss.  - :)Ozzyslovechild 01:31, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't say they were better than the 'head, just different! When you talk about 70s and 80s 'metal', these two names are bound to come up. Basically, because they are legends. 193.238.233.2 15:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  One Bold Step:  Moving this line to discussion page: 

message: * The Chase Is Better Than The Catch (2000; compilation)
 * Over The Top - The Rarities (2000; compilation)
 * All The Aces (2001; compilation)
These are not official compilations, so they can't be put in the official discography. - Roda, 17:02, July 13, 2005 (UTC).
:Bootlegs and other non official works are usually included in the discographies.  Although it should be made clear what they're official status is. - 81.179.72.27 17:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compilations 

message: With a small and fairly rubbish article on Pete Gill, the page now has no dead links. Alf 00:43, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue letter day 

message: * In reply to my email asking about the status of copyright on lyrics, I received this  reply from the webmaster of Motorhead's Official Site "All of the songs are copyrighted and there would be a problem reproducing them.  However, we do provide them on the official site at www.imotorhead.com. Maybe you could just link to them?". I will attempt further personal communication later this year. Alf 10:19, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singles 

message: I'm working on a template for the discography, I must admit, it's a bit garish and big, it's in my sandbox, if people would like to comment here, I'd be grateful. Thanks. Alf 11:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Template added, no longer in my sandbox, please comment anyway. Alf 14:53, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I expanded the template by adding the former members. I hope you like it. Roda 19:19, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup that's fine by me, Rick Block gave his advice to keep it minimal and if you'd seen what I'd made, you'd agree! It's still nice and tidy. Rick did that one for free! Alf melmac 20:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Template

message: The main reason why I added the clean up template is because the section is really not written in a quality manner.For example: the bigger half of the section is about the "classic era" of the band (1976-1982). Second, Pete Gill is not even mentioned (Phil Taylor quits in 1983 in one sentence, but he is fired in 1992 in a following sentence). The trouble with record labels - for more than 10 years the band had trouble finding a "normal" label (1984 - 1994/5). For the reasons stated, I think this section should be completely rewritten and expanded. (In my opinion, the section should be modeled by the Metallica page) User:Roda 19 December, 2005 22:09 (UTC)
:You're quite right, by comparison it needs a big re-write, I'm copying the section to a new sandbox, Phil did leave in 1983, he realised his mistake, rejoined the band and was fired in 1992. I'll make that clearer somehow. If anyone wants to help expand and play with it there for a bit, that would be good. Alf melmac 22:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: School is over by the end of the week, and since I'll have 3 weeks off, I'll try to write a completely new article. User:Roda 20 December, 2005 08:07 (UTC)
This is looking pretty good now ... at least to me. I suggest that the cleanup tag be removed, but will await views on this before doing so. One thing the "history" section could do with is a bit more structure, i.e. some sub-headings, etc., but that's not so much a cleanup issue. Metamagician3000 09:45, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up of the History section 

message: "The band's mainstream success has dwindled since the late 1980s"
I would like to query this line as over the last couple of years in particular in the UK the band have bounced back to a wider audience and the Inferno album is critically acclaimed with the Heavy Metal scene. Their American and European profile is also at something of a peak just now and the band are held in a form of reverence akin to the status of AC/DC, Ozzy, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest etc. There should be a bit of rewrite at the end to acknowledge the fact that the band is on the up again. The term "mainstream" for this type of band is a bit grey as many Heavy Metal bands don't release singles or they are pretty much ignored while still selling millions of albums and having huge sell out tours.
:You know, it would be nice if you signed your comments (that is, of course, if you are registered). It's not so hard - just type four tildes. Roda 21:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popularity 

message: Lemmy probably doesn't pronounce the name /'məʊtəhɛd/. /ə/ would actually be a completely acceptable and common pronounciation of germanic "ö". Also the transcription is clearly phonematic, so it should be given as ['məʊtəhɛd]. -- bkhl 16:07, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Been thinking about this for some time. I'll add more stuff soon! Roda 15:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There, I've added some. I'll add more when I have the time. Roda 16:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia section 

message: Does this really need to be a seperate paragraph, and indeed the second section in the article? It would seem to be more appriopriate either as part of the Trivia section or as a Motorhead in Popular Culture section. S.Skinner 16:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with this, but mainly because of my aversion to this "sport". I may be biased! 193.238.233.2 14:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now moved to Supporters section, where the motorheadbangers should now be looking at what is otherwise essential for that para.--Alf melmac 13:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Motorhead in WWE

message: I've got this album, I'm pretty sure it's a Castle cash-in job, but I will dig it out over the weekend. It basically contained about 10 tracks which must have been recorded around 79/80 because it has a demo version of Ace Of Spades and some others off that album under a different name. Really basic production, but pretty good stuff. Where would this fit into the discography and would you mind if I added it, or at least gave you the details to add (I'm very new to wiki!). Wouldn't want to mess this excellent article up! 193.238.233.2 14:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are many non-sanctioned releases of Motorhead stuff, we have only included the officially released stuff. --Alf melmac 13:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dirty Love album, circa 1988/89

message: What do the words in the cd booklet of Kiss Of Death mean?  (---Nati vt victi, omnes moritvri nemimi crede, age solvte ambvlare per plvrimarvm anima rvm oceanvm pedes vlx madefacit qvodcvmqve facis, nos primi, et melivs, fecimvs---)Lemmy the lurch 03:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The best I could come up with on some translation website (after changing some of the Vs to Us) was "Nation when victor omnes morituri nemimi to believe age loosening to walk very plurimarum breath rum oceanum going on foot ulx madefacit whatsoever a bundle , we first , and better fecimus" - hmmm, no wonder wars are started! Bubba hotep 19:30, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not great latin but is roughly - Born as they conquer, all will die in no belief, through very many spirits scarcely did the ocean make the feet wet. Whatever you do, we did it first and better. --Alf melmac 19:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translations 

message: Please see here for the latest "discussion" Bubba hotep 12:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motorhead disambig vs redirect - the saga conituum... 

message: I had heard some interesting stories about Motörhead's cover of Metallica's Enter Sandman which they produced for ECW as entrance music for long time ECW wrestler Sandman.  As is mentioned in the Enter Sandman article, ECW commissioned Motörhead to produce the cover after a royalty dispute of some sort with Metallica.  The instrumentation of the two songs is so similar that they are virtually indistinguishable until the vocals start.  I had also heard a rumor that there was some friction between the two bands after the cover was produced because Metallica had given permission for the cover version out of respect for Motörhead, but hadn't been told that it was being produced for use with ECW.
Anyway, if someone with access to Motörhead sources is familiar with the backstory of the song, and can provide an appropriate reference, it sounded like an interesting short paragraph to include in this article, either in the Trivia or Wrestling sections.  The story ties together two heavy hitters in metal with professional wrestling, making it possibly an interesting aside to fans of any of the three.  The cover song itself is still available, although I don't remember on which specific album (music of ECW? I downloaded it from Itunes about six months ago).  Dugwiki 23:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, "Metallica" and "royalty dispute" - sounds familiar! That sounds like a very good bit of trivia, if it can be sourced. I have a bit of a problem with Motorhead and sweaty men dressed in lycra being addressed in the same sentence... however thanks for that. I must say, their cover of Whiplash on the new album is both top notch and banging. Besides, what Metallica does every 3 years, Motorhead does every other... and better. opinion getting me into trouble again Bubba hotep 00:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motörhead's cover of [[Metallica]]'s [[Enter Sandman]] for trivia section? 

message: I have only ever seen Motorhead once but I think it is worth a mention. Sometime in the early-mid-70s we went to Hammersmith Odeon to see Blue Oyster Cult. To our delight the support was Motorhead. They were shambolic but we loved them. 
I had seen Larry Wallis in Pink Fairies once (at Northampton, UK, County Cricket Ground) about a year or so before, I recall their shambolic performance after turning up late (can't recall their support)). 
I had also seen Motorhead a few times with and without Lemmy - a highlight in HW was him machine-gunning the audience by holding his Rickenbacker on his shoulder. He did this when supporting BOC. It was, I think, when he started using that unique playing style and the angled down microphone. 
They played Silver Machine at the HO and their eponymous track (b-side of HW's Kings of Speed single) and another HW fave that HW never played 'Lost Johnny'. Other tracks included at least one Pink Fairies song, Larry Wallis's 'Police Car' (which I remembered from the Stiffs Tour) and the inevitable Louie Louie.
I had always thought that this BOC support was MH's debut....
Does the trivia section mention the Motorhead Tribute Album?
Finally, we enjoyed a Motorhead tribute band last year ' Motorheadache'! Apparently they are liked by members of Motorhead too.
Royzee 18:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: BOC Support

message: Motorhead made a guest appearance on an episode of the Drew Carey show. I am too lazy to look anything up right now about it. BrainRotMenacer 08:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  An addition to the trivia section 

message: This is a very good article in en wiki, about music (& rock, metal). I think that article coming soon "arrive" to Featured article candidates. good job Alf ^_^ --Xsamurai 12:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why thanks, some of it's driving me nuts, but hey, they're worth it. It will need a lot of polish and there's still a decade missing before we even start looking towards a featured article though, one day.... --12:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Motorhead featured article, coming soon ;)

message: This article need pictures. I know photos of the band in action at various dates are going to be a long call, but it should be possible to get hold of a poster or flyer for the first gig, Burridge reproduces one in the Illustrated Guide for example - it looks like a b&w repro of a colour flyer, and I still haven't knackered my Bomber, Ace of Spades and 1916 'picture booklets' but they'll be tricky to fit into the text space without some juggling, and the 1916 album was not 'toured' as such and therefore wouldn't fit naturally in the text - bah! I'm really desirous of the 86 Monsters of Rock poster though, which I never went to :( If there is anyone willing to scan/photo hand flyers/posters/adverts for the original albums they'd at least make it less text dense. Thanks--Alf melmac 13:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll try and scan the ones from the Rock 'n' Roll booklet. Btw., nice rewrite mate! Roda 16:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: Everytime I come to this page I see "heavy rock" up at the top and "heavy metal" in the first sentence. The difference is grating. Can someone please make them match, especially since "heavy rock" isn't really a genre? Please make them both say "heavy metal." That would be organized. Sorry to be anal but would be appreciated. --Tim010987 Tim010987 4:09 PM, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I find this very annoying to. It should say heavy metal up at the top and heavy metal in the first sentence. Also I think hard rock should be removed from the info box because I don't see anything hard rock about Motorhead, just straight up headbanging heavy metal. 68.102.235.239 (talk) 04:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Heavy rock" 

message: I wanted to strongly suggest the possibility of incorporating punk into the genres, since Lemmy often identifies with it just as much, if not more so, than metal. Surely this means something? Punk77 has a Motorhead page. The Damned, Ramones, Sex Pistols, Plasmatics etc all included Lemmy and Motorhead in the punk scene. I think they have just as much metal sound as they do punk (punk isn't always Anti-Flag, so I think many people get confused). I hink there might be a POV error with several metal fans not liking punk, so consequently they don't want Motorhead to be classified as such. All my friends and I dig Motorhead and we're into punk, and not a lot of metal (Yes not a source, but I'm just saying). Enough people have mentioned this already, so there has to be some meaning behind it... --Tim010987 Tim010987 12:29 AM, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
:Lemmy does identify with to some extent - he identifies his music (and consequently the band's) as rock and roll though, though they do/did, as stated in the article, attract fans from the punk scene. Similar to the issue with NWOBHM being included, if there is reliable sourced information to support this that can be included to improve the article then I would more inclined to add it in. At this moment in time, neither punk nor NWOBHM are discussed in direct relation to the band's genre.--Alf melmac 07:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punk rock 

message: There is now a template for this, using Burridge's numbering. I've added it to the discography article and replaced the raw mark up in this article. It may also serve on other sub pages when they are written.--Alf melmac 15:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lineups 

message: This article need pictures. I know photos of the band in action at various dates are going to be a long call, but it should be possible to get hold of a poster or flyer for the first gig, Burridge reproduces one in the Illustrated Guide for example - it looks like a b&w repro of a colour flyer, and I still haven't knackered my Bomber, Ace of Spades and 1916 'picture booklets' but they'll be tricky to fit into the text space without some juggling, and the 1916 album was not 'toured' as such and therefore wouldn't fit naturally in the text - bah! I'm really desirous of the 86 Monsters of Rock poster though, which I never went to :( If there is anyone willing to scan/photo hand flyers/posters/adverts for the original albums they'd at least make it less text dense. Thanks--Alf melmac 13:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll try and scan the ones from the Rock 'n' Roll booklet. Btw., nice rewrite mate! Roda 16:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...and for picking up on the other Todd-related error, too! The more people reading through this, the better, I think, because I missed that one as well! Cheers, Roda. :) Bubba hotep 19:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

text: They're bloody marvellous, thanks Mark :) --Alf melmac 07:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad you like, Alf. I've got plenty more, many bands, I will be contributing bit by bit ;) MarkMarek 19:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a comment from an innocent bystander who has no previous affiliation with Alf or the Motorhead project :D. I just wanted to say A) the images are an nice addition.. thank you...  and B) If Brooke, Margaret, Ivana or Wanda suddenly join the band as second guitarists... feel free to add their images as well :D . 142.167.75.132 19:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: I noticed Bubba adding some information about Petagno's cover art from the Inferno 30th Anniv. DVD interview into Rock 'n' Roll. It would be nice to do this for all those covers he gives an insight into. A summary of it could be then done for the cover art section of this article. I took the liberty, as I used on Orgasmatron to change the reference to:  About Joe Petagno - interview section with Joe Petagno, bonus DVD with Inferno 30th Anniversary edition SPV69748.  I'm pasting that here so it can be changed if needs be and easily found when needed.--Alf melmac 00:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to Bubba who has been working on this today.--Alf melmac 20:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is both a joy and a penance – not going to be around much during daylight hours for the next few days! Plus, it has been a day of many weathers; rain, sleet, hail. You name it! Bubba hotep 21:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I disagree on that one, the compacted references are fine, relevant page numbers are easy enough to find. I'd rather see the labour go elsewhere at the moment.--Alf melmac 23:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough, though if you want to get this article featured that's what'll have to happen. LuciferMorgan 10:57, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the process is being even more obnoxious than normal? It wasn't a problem for another article I helped through FA shrugs --Alf melmac 11:05, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately that's the case - if you need help doing the work give me a bell since I own "White Line Fever" and could help. LuciferMorgan 20:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if you're ever at a loose end and you're sure it would be time well spent, be my guest! As a by product it would be good to make sure I didn't duff any up, I have been known to make the odd slip  :s --Alf melmac 12:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be time well spent. I'll see if I can find time, but the book's always worth going over again after the first read. LuciferMorgan 15:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things to do on a rainy day 

message: Hi guys, when a very good "peer review" of this nice article?? When?? --[X-S] 19:36, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer review and later featured article?

message: Re the comment of having 'sold 16 million albums in the US alone': have we proof? They have no  albums certified Gold by the RIAA, let alone Platinum. 
I think the paragraph on Motorheadache should be moved to its own page, myself, with just a mention in passing on this main page. 
Cheers, Al—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.218.29 (talk • contribs) 3 June 2007
:Indeed as is highlited in the "Bronze and silver" section (what a clever title, genius who thought of that :p) they have as yet to break past silver. The sales figures have been in and out fair frequently and has consistently been removed as no-one has been able to be cite it, at present it is not in the article. The paragraph on Motorheadache was overlong but was trimmed some time back. I'm not sure there's enough about for a fair page (in respect of giving equal treatment to) of Motorhead tribute bands, but I won't stop anyone who wants to give it a go.--Alf melmac 06:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Query

message: The Motorhead articles are featured articles in it.wiki and sq.wiki. And when this article in en wiki in FA? Can I trust this thing in a next future? X-S—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 79.9.7.88 (talk • contribs).
:The FA process on en-wiki is not something I'm enamoured by at this moment but now there is a Motörhead project, that is more likely now. At the moment we are discussing whether the page has too much minor info in respect of tracking which tours etc. I think there's still some way to go on the 'how they've impacted culture' areas too, but that's a fairly easy matter of choosing and balancing up the cites on that. Also, check out the new Motörhead Portal.--Alf melmac 06:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 04-08

message: Officially, if memory serves, this stands at 130.1 decibels and is held by ManOWar. However, I was told by a sound engineer who worked at the Cornwall Coliseum (near St. Austell) that Motorhead once made
an attempt at the world record when playing there, sometime in the early 80's, and peaked at 134 decibels. 
Apparently Lemmy was appalled by the physical consequences of this (some people's ears were bleeding apparently) and refused to play as loud again.
Can anyone confirm this?
- Meltingpot
Meltingpot 12:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  World volume record 

message: ...but it is fucking brilliant. Don't change it - FA means fuck all! LessHeard vanU 22:02, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I lost any/all respect for the FA process when Paul McCartney lost out because it had too many references???(one of the absolute LOW' points in Wiki's entire history) The upper echelon of anal Wikidom would never allow Motorhead to get FA status because if it moved in next door to all the other Featured Articles... all of their lawns would die. 142.167.75.132 22:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not an encyclopedia article... 

message: According to the article 4 albums don't feature a variation of Snaggletooth on the cover, 1 of them being On Parole. However I own this album with the cover looking like this: http://www.muzika.hr/images/Rubrika_11/20060601_motorhead234.jpg, wich is the latest edition of the album as far as I'm aware of.
Thoughts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fod (talk • contribs) 18:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Originally it didn't have Snaggletooth. Roda 18:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  On Parole album => snaggletooth 

message: Why has punk metal been removed. They are clearly punk metal as the are the ones that helped to expand the genre, therefore I will re-add the genre. Thundermaster367 10:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot find a reliable source to verify that they are classified as punk metal, if you are able to supply such, I'd be happy to leave it standing.--Alf melmac 11:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've looked through my resources and can't find any mention of Motorhead being a punk metal band (let alone find any mention of punk metal period) It may be listed on some online amateur webzine or fansite... but since they don't pass WP:RS I haven't browsed any of them to see if it originates from any of them. The Wikipedia Punk metal article itself is one of those "fairy-tale" genre articles that is abound with pov and original research. If punk metal were to be removed from this article I wouldn't protest  and I doubt too many other editors would either  156.34.223.225 11:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Punk metal]] 

message: I'm adding back NWOBHM as it clearly a good term for MH. Does anyone object? ThundermasterTRUC 15:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is not supported anywhere in the text and so isn't cited, you have a cite to use for it? See also my comment on Template talk:Infobox Musical artist.--Alf melmac 10:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it might be a good "term" for Motorhead. But the field is a genre field and NWOBHM isn't a genre. It's a description of an "era of emergence" for heavy metal bands of British origin. The genre is heavy metal. (actually the Rock 'genre' done in a heavy metal 'style'... but I won't get picky :D ) 156.34.208.51 (talk) 11:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the NWOBHM a genre with elements of classic metal and punk rock? Thanks for reading, ThundermasterTRUC 15:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: NWOBHM isn't a genre at all. There is as yet, no information at all about NWOBHM in the article because in all the research I and Bubba did to get this article to FA, did we find any reliable sources to say anything about Motorhead being part of the NWOBHM. It's a common label used by various commentators, and only as a label - none of which have said anything useful about their part in it.--Alf melmac 07:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "The New Wave of British Heavy Metal (frequently abbreviated as NWOBHM or N.W.o.B.H.M.) is a heavy metal music movement that started in the late 1970s" so starts the wiki page on NWOBHM. The question may be moot as the current discussion on the genre field of the infobox is heading towards removing the field.--Alf melmac 11:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NWOBHM has been removed 

message: Which should it say in the lead-in? "Rock" keeps it general, though they are more often associated with heavy metal and their style has remained consistent throughout their career. So shouldn't it say 'heavy metal' or 'rock' in the lead-in, instead of 'hard rock'? Also, the first genre in the infobox should be heavy metal, not hard rock. --Tim010987 (talk) 09:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Take time to read throught the first two paragraphs, I really do think that we have the right balance and order in this. Not all their songs are heavy metal, speed metal or thrash metal (in fact imh[but personal]o I would label any of their songs as thrash metal but hey ho- the cites say so) but all their songs are hard rock (those that are heavy metal, speed metal and thrash metal are hard rock by default as they are sub-categories of hard rock. So the article says - loosely put - this is a hard rock band typically classfied as heavy metal, speed metal or thrash metal, with Lemmy disagreeing with such labelling, prefering "rock 'n roll". Am I missing something in the balance of the article, as I think it not only sums up parts of rest of the article, but puts it into rational classification order.--Alf melmac 13:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rock vs. heavy metal vs. hard rock 

message: why are so many things that seem/are important ARENT ON HIGHER priority?!?!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.28.14 (talk) 22:32, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: PRIORITY BIAS

message: The Los Angeles Philharmonic (is) or (are)....I would say "is," am I wrong?
The Beatles are  (definitely)
The Rolling Stones are  (definitely)
The Grateful Dead is a band.  (Because it's singular, I use the is).  Since dead is ambiguous as to number, it could go either way.
Blondie is a punk rock band, etc., not Blondie are a punk rock band...
King Crimson is a band headed up by Robert Fripp...not King Crimson are a band headed....
Anyone else have a thought on this?  Is this a more British usage, because I would have said "Motorhead is..."
Just curious. Not that practiced on musical topics, would like to learn.--Levalley (talk) 21:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:ENGVAR - articles about British articles use British English, American and British English differences#Formal and notional agreement explains further.--Alf melmac 22:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  I thought that was what was going on, just trying to make sure.Levalley (talk) 23:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyediting issue

message: The history section is well referenced, but I miss citations (thus also sources) in the statement about Motörhead's lyrics (style section), but foremost whole paragraphs in the supporters and cover art sections. I will not add this or this to the article, but I just recommend to add citations as soon as possible, because this does not really fit WP:FACR style. Cheers :) --  LYKANTROP  ✉  11:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole paragraphs were added after the article passed the F.A. assessment - I have note, way back in the edit summary a foreign site which linked to a site in English with the quote, but last I checked that relevant page on the English site wasn't there as the site was being revamped. If it doesn't re-appear and the foreign version doesn't pass muster, which I'm not sure it does, then they may have to be removed.--Alf melmac 23:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Burridge's blog provides Lemmy's reply, we just need a decent source for Joe's statement now, I couldn't find it on the blog.--Alf melmac 23:18, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Joe's words can be found on this forum and this foreign rock site, I'm not sure they'd be considered as reliable sources though.--Alf melmac 23:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The foreign site is a Polish fan site about Motöthead, so it is unfortunately not reliable. The other one is a forum, so it is also not considered reliable. And blogs are in most cases also not reliable. I think that all unsourced stuff that comes to the article should be immediately removed because otherwise the article looses its quality.--  LYKANTROP  ✉  11:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Blogs per se are not encouraged for sure, the blog providing the Lemmy quote is that of Alan Burridge (writer). The link in that polish fan is still dead I note also it is addressed blastwaves.com/motorforum... I note that Joe's original statement seems to have been made on his website, but is no longer there. Makes the two halves a bit problematic at this moment in time.--Alf melmac 21:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:OR|OR]] in a [[WP:FA|FA]]?

message: I bloody well give up on this now that everyone and his dog has been pissing on them, they were 95% accurate against song, book, article and tribute bands and now they're decidely not, and I am giving up chasing them down. Thanks.--Alf melmac 09:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Umlauts

message: It seems there's a bit of disagreement over what to call the icon. It may be worth noting that the artist Joe Petgno refers to it as Snaggletooth. Here's what he said in the wake of the acrimonous parting of company with Motörhead and their managent on Feb. 24,2008: "As I have been asked by so many of you worldwide, a small army in fact to Resurrect Snaggletooth I’m going to do just that - with or without them. I believe (thanks to all of you) that the Snag is strong enough to stand it’s own ground in this profit oriented world as the symbol it has always stood for - the little guy against the many / money, and to quote one of you; Why the hell should Snaggletooth die because of greedy power hungry bastards? This year the Snag and I will going solo if need be - a first in Heavy / Rock History" . See also his home page www.petagno.dk for Snaggletooth merchandise. — Drwhawkfan (talk) 12:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad that someone brought this up.  I never new the icon had a "name" until I started reading Wikipedia and Snaggletooth is the first name I learned.  It looks like there is a nice reference for Snaggletooth.  I'm sure someone will provide one for War-pig, we'll see which is more credible. J04n(talk page) 13:53, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Alf, in this edit summary explains it here. I'm sure he has a ref for it. I can't remember what I recall about the matter to be totally honest, but it will come down to what is reliably referenced, I'm sure, and if it comes down to it: both? I don't know. – B.hotep •talk• 14:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm - I didn't see a reason not to take :Alan Burridge's word for it see here. We should however use cited info, and I'm not keen to do a War-Pig vs. Snaggletooth contest as that would invlove a lot of checking that we're talking about the image and not the song - the 'googlefight' without checks results in "2,030 for motorhead snaggletooth image" "27,400 for motorhead war-pig image". I'll go hunting in a bit though, have other things I need to do.--Alf melmac 10:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The above link to Alan Burridge is to the cricket player, I assumed it should have been to Alan Burridge (writer) but now I think it was meant to be User:Alan Burridge, but they seem to be the same person, do we know that they are? J04n(talk page) 10:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Alan Burridge (Motorhead biographer and writer) and User:Alan Burridge are indeed the same person. A very reliable source if ever there was one. – B.hotep •talk• 11:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Ooops yes I keep forgetting about that cricketer, sorry. Sheesh, we're going to end with one of the 'called A by B, C by D' constructions I can see. We can see easily that Petagno is now relating to it as Snaggletooth ('Snag' to his friends...) - I don't remember seeing him do so before he stopped creating artwork for the band, Bubba, do you remember if he ever used the words in those interviews on the CDs you listening to? Alan mentions the logo as War-Pig in his blog on Sunday, July 27, 2008 when talking about the Hamsters' logo, Ted Carroll, when speaking about the special limited edition 30th anniversary version of Motorhead’s 1977 debut album calls the logo War-Pig. Merchandisers appear to use both - rockabilia, tourdates (which purports to have "100% Official Band Merchandise" - [ahem]) for example are in the War-Pig camp, ny-123 and grindtone are in the Snaggletooth camp.--Alf melmac 11:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we save everyone alot of time and effort by changing the third sentence in the "cover art" section to read "War-Pigplace ref here (AKA Snaggletoothplace ref here) is the fanged face that serves as the symbol of Motörhead" with one reference for each? J04n(talk page) 11:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer to switch the name to last position, reading: "The fanged face that serves as the symbol of Motörhead has been referred to variously as "War-Pig"place ref here and "Snaggletooth".place ref here" This avoids the brackets and the "AKA" (and sort of highlights that two camps exist). Not sure about limiting the refs, I think Petagno's, Carroll's and Burridge's views all relevant due to their equal closeness to the band, though C's and B's view could be written into one cite to keep one ref number for each. Getting a permalink to something on Petagno's site might be somewhat tricky, he is in the habit of not archiving anything for access and moving things about at a fair pace. The letter published in the forum pages and repeated in a blog here for example, is now (afaics) only on forums and blogs.--Alf melmac 12:20, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

text: "I used to be schizophrenic, but we're fine now."?--Alf melmac 14:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, for the rest of the 20 minute piece, he doesn't even call it a name. "It" or "the head" are the only nomenclatures – so I suppose in that respect, he doesn't have a name for it, as he said. In 2005, anyway. Mind you, in the same interview Phil Campbell said he [Petagno] was "part of the band, the heart, the engine...". How things change, eh? – B.hotep •talk• 14:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If we try and add in the change of view, we can easy cite the DVD for his earlier useage, but the forum would likely not be seen as a reliable source for his current useage, so we would be in the same position as we are with his response to his stopping doing artwork for the band - we still don't have a cite for the quote of him about that in the article, as he removed the comment from his website without providing an archive link or anything equally helpful and we're left with, as we appear to have again, his letters reproduced only in forums.--Alf melmac 14:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Further to that- I just noticed on this "snaggletooth collection" page of prints that there is a very visible copyright mark following the word "SNAGGLETOOTH", maybe his apparently recent adoption of the name is a recent development in the split, time will likely tell, particularly as he appears to have decided to copyright the name that Lemmy et al (according to Burridge), Burridge and Carroll don't use.--Alf melmac 14:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You can register a word/phrase as a trademark, which I don't think is called a "copyright", although it may involve the copyright office. I believe Billy Joel did this - if you find those Columbia House offers from the 80s (with all the little stamps), it always said Billy Joel(TM). Luminifer (talk) 15:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Icon

message: From the bonus DVD, title 7 ("Joe Petagno"), chapter 1, at 01'39", Petagno says,
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bubba hotep (talk • contribs) 14:02, 6 June 2009
:"I used to be schizophrenic, but we're fine now."?--Alf melmac 14:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, for the rest of the 20 minute piece, he doesn't even call it a name. "It" or "the head" are the only nomenclatures – so I suppose in that respect, he doesn't have a name for it, as he said. In 2005, anyway. Mind you, in the same interview Phil Campbell said he [Petagno] was "part of the band, the heart, the engine...". How things change, eh? – B.hotep •talk• 14:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If we try and add in the change of view, we can easy cite the DVD for his earlier useage, but the forum would likely not be seen as a reliable source for his current useage, so we would be in the same position as we are with his response to his stopping doing artwork for the band - we still don't have a cite for the quote of him about that in the article, as he removed the comment from his website without providing an archive link or anything equally helpful and we're left with, as we appear to have again, his letters reproduced only in forums.--Alf melmac 14:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Further to that- I just noticed on this "snaggletooth collection" page of prints that there is a very visible copyright mark following the word "SNAGGLETOOTH", maybe his apparently recent adoption of the name is a recent development in the split, time will likely tell, particularly as he appears to have decided to copyright the name that Lemmy et al (according to Burridge), Burridge and Carroll don't use.--Alf melmac 14:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You can register a word/phrase as a trademark, which I don't think is called a "copyright", although it may involve the copyright office. I believe Billy Joel did this - if you find those Columbia House offers from the 80s (with all the little stamps), it always said Billy Joel(TM). Luminifer (talk) 15:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: From the 30th Anniversary issue of Inferno (2005)

message: I saw that the punk rock genre was added then removed. I don't really care, but a lot of their early stuff is pretty punk rock (the demo version of Vibrator, for instance, couldn't be anything else really). There are also citations on the page that say Lemmy sympathizes more with punk than metal. So, if anyone adds it, this is probably why.. but, I don't care and am not going to change anything. Luminifer (talk) 04:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it and as I said in the edit summary, I don't get involved in genres as a rule, but punk does not have a place there for sure. Yes, they had punk fans because of the similar speed and "attitude" of some of the early songs, but they didn't fit the punk mould in any other way (looks, fashion, influences) – punk was about more than the music. – B.hotep •talk• 12:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, that's a larger debate though... (what if a band looks like a punk band but plays heavy metal? where would you put them?)... and actually, they don't fit the 'heavy metal' image either. Luminifer (talk) 14:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And further... I personally think they should be listed as 'hard rock' -- in fact, if you go look at the wiki article for heavy metal, it's not very good, but it also really doesn't described Motorhead very well.... but, what can I do, eh? Luminifer (talk) 14:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And this is why I don't get involved normally... :) – B.hotep •talk• 16:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Punk rock

message: Why don't we change that text from "a rock band" to "a band"? :) Luminifer (talk) 21:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rock band

message: Looking at the entries in the Filmography, many of them seem to just be instances where one of the band's songs was used in the soundtrack, not a film in which the band actually appears (ie. Grosse Point Blank). Shouldn't the list be reduced to films in which the band members actually appear, rather than just being a list of soundtrack contributions? --IllaZilla (talk) 01:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a good point, might be worth splitting it into two sections. And possibly expanded to include TV appearances such as when they appeared on The Young Ones playing Ace of Spades.Andrewself (talk) 15:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, soundtrack appearances belong in a discography. "Filmography" implies that the band are in the films, not just that their music is used. I say move all the soundtrack appearances to the discography article, leave the films they actually appear in, and do a subsection for television appearances/performances. --IllaZilla (talk) 20:32, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect the filmography will at some point in the future be bombed as it is trivia, and quite rightly so in my opinion. I'd only regard this list to be of any importance if it listed only those films in which Motorhead appear or where their songs had been commisioned for the soundtrack, rather than listing films that simply use their music. — Drwhawkfan (talk) 12:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been a couple of weeks and no objections have been raised, so I've removed the list of films from which they have contributed to the soundtrack. If there's any here that should be re-added (i.e. because the band actually do appear in the film), then please re-add them—Drwhawkfan (talk) 09:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

text: I believe the only one that should be considered for return is Hardware b/c Lemmy is in it.  I suppose a decision should be made as to whether Lemmy constitutes the band or should the info only be on his page. J04n(talk page) 09:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even that one belongs in the Motörhead article, because it was only Lemmy in it. If anything it belongs in the Lemmy article sure it is anyway :) – B.hotep •talk• 11:21, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Filmography

message: There seems to be a lot of detail about individual albums that might be better situated on the individual pages for the respective albums, as it is it seems like a bit of overkill (excuse pun). Gwladys24 (talk) 17:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: NWOBHM was a movement, not a genre. If you look back through the archives of this talk page, you will find similar "discussions" to this... well, no they actually had people putting more of a case back and forth than "what I have to say". – B.hotep •talk• 21:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Album details

message: I don't see why we can't just put rock and roll in the info box. A quote from a Rock the Rough Guide pg. 587., "represented muscular, deadly rock and roll," and then on pg. 588 they refer to Ace of Shades(the album that is) as "No holds barred, no-frills, rock 'n' roll".Rockgenre (talk) 19:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rock and roll

message: Look that: Bombers and Eagles in '92 & Inferno Tour. i'd like to make other mh tours, so I HELP YOU, AND YOU HELP ME.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.65.148.76 (talk) 22:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Before you start see Wikipedia:MUSIC#Concert tours, there is criteria as to what constitutes a notable tour.  If they qualify then fantastic. J04n(talk page) 23:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Motorhead Tours

message: We really should put a do not modify clause next to genre, no? I would put it but when I do someone often yells at me that it's not necessarily. Often right before someone adds a new genre. Almost makes me think that people want others to change it, just so they can revert it and get more "edit points" :) Luminifer (talk) 04:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Damn, you've spotted my cunning plan to take over the world and kill all humans up the edit count! :p I have no problem with putting a  I've done similar on one of the few album articles that have sources stating genre that others repeatedly feel need removing and replacing with a single genre.--Alf melmac 05:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, let's see.  It hasn't helped at Black Sabbath but has worked wonderfuly for the "voice type" field for singers. J04n(talk page) 08:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Alf - actually, I have a feeling I got the idea from one of your edits. Unless it was you who yelled at me somewhere a few months ago ;) (I don't think it was) Luminifer (talk) 05:39, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that 2 sources are given that Motorhead play "rock and roll", but none for "heavy metal" or "speed metal". Lemmy has always maintained that Motorhead is not a metal band. In most record stores, Motorhead music can be found under pop/rock-not heavy metal. Motorhead is certainly not "speed metal".Mk5384 (talk) 20:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

text: If nothing else, I think that "rock and roll" should be listed first. Any objections?Mk5384 (talk) 20:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre

message: this edit removed a source for info - our link WP:YOUTUBE gives the following advice:
There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis.
Please evaluate this link.--163.1.147.64 (talk) 17:15, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: You Tube

message: From Talk:Motorhead (disambiguation): "The belief in England that Motorhead is slang for someone who uses amphetamines comes from the misinterpretation of the expression "speed freak". Speed in this insatnce refers to speed as in cars rather than speed as in drugs. Lemmy has clarified this: "The name comes from an old American slang for speedfreak, or lover of speed as in cars, etc. Vroom vroom."" – Drwhawkfan (talk) 17:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Lemmy uses the term "motorhead" in reference to the drug "speed": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh-pAykfQ-8&feature=related 91.7.106.15 (talk) 02:28, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Lot of decent sources there that we (bubba and I) didn't manage to dig up. Maybe the wording on 'orginally to be called' could be sharpened up, whether apocryphal or not, it's what's said in his biog., are there other sources that state this as such? - Yes the last straw for Clarke was Stand By Your Man, so it was as a consequence, I couldn't get the his build up of frustration properly sourced to anywhere reliable, maybe that's possible now? I go 'Hmm' at the cocaine on the border stuff - he was carrying speed wasn't he? - this makes it look like he likely was carrying coke as it follows on from his comments about him doing the "wrong drugs" (by which I've always thought he meant "I did speed and alcohol - different drugs than the other guys - so they're hypocritical b*st*rds"). I'm not sure there is going to be a perfect way of putting across his leaving/sacking from HW - open to suggestions though.--163.1.147.64 (talk) 09:09, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Early days edit

message: In the beginning (the sentence "Motörhead are a British rock band")—shouldn't the word "are" be replaced with "is". The name "Motörhead" is singular, "are" is only used for bands with plurals such as the Ramones—among others. I understand that this article is written in British English and not American English, but I do not know British English as I am an American citizen. And I know this article is a featured article, all I am doing is trying to improve it. So anyways, correct me if I am wrong, but it should be "is" rather than "are". If I am wrong, please tell me. --Blaguymonkey (talk) 06:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You are wrong, for the reason you outline. British English uses "are" for the names of bands. Lancevortex (talk) 22:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Is" or "are"

message: YES, MOTORHEAD IS TODAYS FEATURED ARTICLE  —Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomGuy666 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is used under a claim of fair use. A detailed rationale can be found at :File:Motörhead.ogg. — TKD::{talk} 00:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: General comments

message: To write Motörhead is one of the greatest bands ever is POV, isn't?--Olbia merda, big MH fan (talk) 10:50, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: A question

message: Which should it say in the lead-in? "Rock" keeps it general, though they are more often associated with heavy metal and their style has remained consistent throughout their career. So shouldn't it say 'heavy metal' or 'rock' in the lead-in, instead of 'hard rock'? Also, the first genre in the infobox should be heavy metal, not hard rock. --Tim010987 (talk) 09:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, a lot of sources I've seen have regarded them as a metal band. Like, the first website (after their offical site, wikipedia page and myspace) seen on goggle describes them as a heavy metal band. I say they're metal first, hard rock second. 173.33.7.60 (talk) 02:22, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: 173.33 - That website falsely claims "Motörhead, originally called Bastard" - please see the relevant line and the cite in the article for the cited information stating Lemmy wanted to call the band this name but was persuaded not to. I am not happy using a site which makes such an obvious error.--Alf melmac 09:36, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Take time to read through the first two paragraphs, I really do think that we have the right balance and order in this. Not all their songs are heavy metal, speed metal or thrash metal (in fact imh[but personal]o I would not label any of their songs as thrash metal but hey ho- the cites say so) but all their songs are hard rock (those that are heavy metal, speed metal and thrash metal are hard rock by default as they are sub-categories of hard rock. So the article says - loosely put - this is a hard rock band typically classfied as heavy metal, speed metal or thrash metal, with Lemmy disagreeing with such labelling, prefering "rock 'n roll". Am I missing something in the balance of the article, as I think it not only sums up parts of rest of the article, but puts it into rational classification order. I would, as has happened in the Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath articles, be happy with 'rock' instead of hard rock, I know that the drive-by genre editors won't like that but I agree with Tim's view there to keep it general. I would prefer the information box genre line to be crushed by elephant, buried in peat and it's name chipped off of all public monuments...--Alf melmac 13:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Genres (both in how they are seen and how they see themselves) are very well covered in the Style section, which is why it is continually dissappointing to have drive-by editors (presumably not bothering to read that section) tinkering around with the first mention of a genre and in the info-box. [In that section is one of my all time favourite quotes from Lemmy, I'll leave you to guess which one that could possibly be...] There has been much discussion about genres over many pages and one of the upshots was, as is a general rule on wiki, that the opening paragraph (if a universally understood term is available) shouldn't use very specific technical terms (imagine that the reader has no previous knowledge of the subject at all) as these will be dealt with and put into context in the body of the article. This is pretty much how we arrive at using something like "rock music" in the descriptor line and "heavy metal" in the infobox (as that is how they are most frequently classified by record shops, charts, etc.). If people really don't want to know much more than the first line and infobox can tell them, they can stop reading, if the reader wants a full low-down, then they can read on and see it all in context.--Alf melmac 15:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

text: *For further discussion, this text is kind of dubious, no? Motörhead are considered to be part of the New Wave of British Heavy Metal which "re-energized heavy metal in the late '70s and early '80s". All Music Guide states that the NWOBHM bands "kicked out all of the blues, sped up the tempo, and toughened up the sound, leaving just a mean, tough, fast, hard metallic core ... We should have, at least, considered 'by some' -- but even beyond that, the sentence claims that the NWOBHM "kicked out the blues" (this is reasonable), but a lot of Motorhead songs are based on the standard blues progression and have a lot of bluesy elements.. Thoughts? :) Luminifer (talk) 15:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup I wasn't overjoyed when that was introduced, the edit was in with a number of other minor change iirc. My take is that NWOBHM is linked, if I wanted to know much about that, I could click the link, so it has now been reduced to only what is specfic to Motörhead.--Alf melmac 15:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

text: The genre in the infobox and lead ought to be the same, which it isn't at the moment. I would go with heavy metal, as it gives a more precise indication of their music style to the general reader rather than the wider category of rock - if I went into a record store to buy a Motorhead CD, I'd go to the heavy metal section. And I would further argue that their music has been one of the most influential facets in the evolution of heavy metal music, there are plenty of published heavy metal encyclopaedias that would re-inforce this claim. As for Lemmy's dislike of the categorisation of his music regarding it all as just rock n roll, this isn't uncommon, most musicians object to being pigeon-holed. But in a sense, how we broadly classify their music here isn't dependent on Lemmy's views, but how it is critically acclaimed. Ultimately, I don't think people care too much except those who go around changing the genre insisting it is either this or that. – Drwhawkfan (talk) 11:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Heavy metal is just a sub-genre of rock. so rock is perfectly accurate. There is no binding rule stating the the lead and the infobox should match. The infobox would be just as accurate if it said rock to match the lead... rather than vicey-versoo. If Allmusic is to be used as a guideline for what genre formatting should look like Allmusic lists "Pop/Rock" as the genre for every single heavy metal band on that website. they have a column called styles which has all the superfluity and fluff. But accurately describe the "genre" (genre is not style) as Pop/Rock. What say we use Motorhead as a shining example for every single Wikipedia article relating to a heavy metal band and change them all to "pop/rock"... that would be the best solution for all. The Real Libs-speak politely 12:03, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The genre's not something that concerns me much, but I do wonder why AllMusic is apparently becoming a bible for some people – Drwhawkfan (talk) 12:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Genre is something which is problematic in all band articles, I think. I just had a look at U2's article – which says rock in the lead, but expands in the infobox – and the history is just as peppered with disagreements as this one and any other you care to look at. I think the key is to find a settlement and stick with it, and I firmly believe the way to do this is to be as loose as possible in the lead. Sure, I would file my Motorhead albums under metal, but then I only have three sections: metal, punk and other – and other is bands like Beastie Boys and Cypress Hill – sure enough doesn't fit there! – B.hotep •talk• 12:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have over 7500 albums in my personal music collection. And I file Motorhead under "M"  :-) The Real Libs-speak politely 13:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I should have elaborated, Libsy. When I file my albums in alpha order, my missus calls me anal, but I do it anyways! When I file them on a spreadsheet (I probably have about the same as you quantity-wise), I have "discog-m" and "discog-p" – "others" don't get noted because there aren't that many others! – B.hotep •talk• 13:42, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: re: "anal" I have a Masters degree in Engineering. My chosen specialty is Asset Management (hence the whole library connection)... you must be fully and completely 'anal' to do what I do for  living. Someone asked me what an Asset Manager was and I said it was just a fancy way of saying "inventory analyst".... so you can see it right there   ASSet Manager... Inventory analyst.... its all connected. The Real Libs-speak politely 13:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My opinion is that the infobox is a brief summation of the artist so the more specific genre should be used, in this case "heavy metal". The opening paragraph on the other hand is an introduction to the article and the more general "rock" or as Wiki libs suggests "pop/rock" is more appropriate.  Then if there are sources describing bands influencing or playing more specific genres ("speed metal", etc) that should be in the body of the article. That said, I would agree with any consensus, that can be pointed to when the genre is edited, that doesn't allow unlimited genres to be listed in the infobox or opening paragraph.  BTW, my Motorhead albums are next to Mozart albums.J04n(talk page) 13:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is "pop/rock" supposed to be the same as Pop rock? If you read the article, this doesn't sound like it applies to Motorhead. If they are not the same thing, then I would suggest that "pop/rock" is such a generic descriptor that we leave it out entirely - "Motorhead is a band" seems fine to me. Luminifer (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What Pop/Rock means is pop music/rock music. I definitely agree that Motorhead IS NOT pop rock (can you imagine if they were? LOL). No, I think what that means is that it's commonly seen that rock music is what's most popular most of the time -- hence, pop music. So even if a band isn't the most popular of groups, if it's rock then it's also pop. I don't how exactly allmusic worked this out, so that's just my guess. Now, we've seen how much discontent there is about what a genre is and what a style is. I don't see a difference, but some people do and allmusic does. So maybe there should be a genre section in the infoboxes for artists, albums, and songs/singles as well as a style section. That way we can show that every band is pop/rock, and then explain what styles they've taken within that genre. So this article, for example, could start off by reading "Motorhead are a British pop/rock band formed in 1975 by bassist, singer and songwriter Lemmy, who has remained the sole constant member.... ....Their music is styled as heavy metal, though Lemmy dislikes such labels, preferring to describe the band's music simply as "rock 'n' roll". We could then get into, later on, how they influenced/dabbled in several sub-styles of metal. This seems like the most logical way to describe any band.Krobertj (talk) 19:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest, I think this subject is so subjective that I'm not sure listing something like this in the infobox is useful to anybody. Luminifer (talk) 21:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Geez you guys have never ever even listened to Heavy Metal. If you compare Judas Priest, Girlschool and Motorhead, many of their songs sound alike.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.108.192.50 (talk) 09:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

text: It should definately be heavy metal. As for 93.138.29.182's post, the term "rock'n'roll" is often informally used by a lot of different bands in a lot of styles, including rock (of all kinds), hard rock, heavy metal and pop. It's used to be "cool", as in music that "rocks". It's another usual way to say that this music "rocks" - though not correct, as it isn't at all any relationship between Motörhead and the original rock'n'roll of the 1950s/60s. It's definately a metal band, why should you argue that? It's a metal band! The term "heavy rock" was what they used before the term "heavy metal" was invented. And he says "we were rocking way before heavy metal, way before punk", but fact is that the band was founded in 1975, and metal had existed since the late 1960s with Black Sabbath, and this kind of music was well-known in 1975. Though if he dislikes the term, it's still what the genre is called. "Heavy rock" is not the name of a genre. It's a usual term used on heavy metal. Rock is a very wide term, and you can make VERY different music and calling it Rock! It's a very diverse genre. The first line in the introduction is therefore confusive. In the introduction, it should be a general term which best describes the music of the band - which is, in this case, heavy metal. A general term would be heavy metal, as that's the genre used in most of their songs. Metal describes more than just saying it's a "rock band". It should stay: Motörhead is an English metal band, not an English rock band! The term "heavy metal" describes more than just "rock", who's a very wide term. And yeah, sorry, this was a very long post, but I hope I was able to express my point. 188.113.91.110 (talk) 23:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: And as for Alf's post: Heavy metal is not a subgenre of hard rock. Metal is much harder than hard rock. Hard rock lies between what is usually described as Rock and Heavy metal. As for the introduction, it also stays that the band was important in the "British Wave of Heavy Metal". Which, in fact, describes the band as a heavy metal band. 188.113.91.110 (talk) 23:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Rock vs. heavy metal vs. hard rock

message: I've never seen a Mercury label Overkill or Bomber, just Spades and everything afterwards. Mercury was the label for Motorhead in the States.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.81.33.59 (talk) 06:46, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was ''Ace of Spades'' the first album released in the United States? 

message: Since Motorhead is both, why not add it in the text instead of just "rock"?  Teh Thrasher (talk) 06:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree this would be much better. And JFTR, you can always get a die-hard Motorhead fan upset if you call this music "heavy metal". Well, Maiden may be classified HM, but Lemmy & Co. have always kicked out that earthy, dirty rock 'n roll thing. "True" heavy metal is often influenced from 80s hair metal, and this is what Lemmy always hated...BUT he will surely not object to anyone saying that their music is "punk-influenced". I think punk is what has always saved rock music from becoming too campy or cheesy. -steamhammer 2.242.169.252 (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Heavy metal/hard rock

message: This article passed a Featured article review in 2007. Since then, the nominator has retired from Wikipedia and the article has degraded; I see several uncited ends of paragraphs and obvious recentism of the "On 1 January 2015 the band did this .... on 2 February 2015 they did that..." which will degrade over time, plus things like "As of 2012, Motörhead have sold more than 15 million albums worldwide" (what about as of 2015?) which are typical of deteriorating FAs. I think this probably needs a featured article review. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:23, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the core of it is sound, just need to remove some of the needless prose such as stating Triple H is a popular wrestler. Also, which of these are industrial music. If, indeed, any of them are notable on wiki.  http://www.discogs.com/Various-Dead-Forever-Tribute-To-Motorhead/release/1747120  Syxxpackid420 (talk) 19:35, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The FAR procedure is aimed at repairing the article to restore its FA status. Who will take the ball and run with it? Binksternet (talk) 05:02, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Motörhead. 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 https://web.archive.org/20150526003105/http://www.theorion.com/2.692/make-em-deaf-forever-1.19715 to http://www.theorion.com/2.692/make-em-deaf-forever-1.19715
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100514125011/http://lincolnshire-bombers.com:80/sponsorship_motorhead.htm to http://lincolnshire-bombers.com/sponsorship_motorhead.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Motorhead have officially disbanded after Lemmy's death and so the page should be corrected to state so
82.42.251.219 (talk) 14:13, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: - by another - with a source - although it is becoming a minor edit war - If you have another source, it would help - Arjayay (talk) 14:58, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 December 2015 

message: Motorhead has disbanded after Lemmy's death, as stated by the drummer in an interview with Swedish magazine Expressen.
RsAboveMc (talk) 15:25, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: See previous section. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 23:59, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 December 2015 

message: It's worth noting Motorhead's association with the WWE (Triple H considered Lemmy a friend), should that be referred to as WWE in the headline?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.7.59.15 (talk) 16:20, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should "Trivia" headline be changed to "WWE?" 

message: Can we change the members list so that it displays "members" as Lemmy, Phil "Wizzö" Campbell, and	Mikkey Dee so as to avoid confusion and show that this was the lineup before the bands end? Much like the page for Nirvana and The Jimi Hendrix Experience.
73.254.1.229 (talk) 20:48, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format inquiry 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Motörhead. 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 https://web.archive.org/20081212000120/http://www.imotorhead.com:80/past_tour_dates.cfm? to http://www.imotorhead.com/past_tour_dates.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:03, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: IMO, it is completely irrelevant what others think of the genre the band played in, Lemmy has stated for 40 years that HE plays Rock n Roll. As far as I'm concerned that's all that should be in the info box. The other genres are there as a courtesy to others opinion really, because he didn't like to be called a Heavy Metal band and had more in common with the Punk Music scene of London in the late 70s. Again anyone who has heard an interview with Lemmy over the last 40 years will know this, so this needs to be sorted out once and for all.Nuro Dragonfly (talk) 22:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: All you need to do is add a source, why is that so hard ?  You don't own this article. Mlpearc (open channel) 22:44, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Mate, you jumped the gun on me doing so....bad timing is all, no hard feelings.Nuro Dragonfly (talk) 23:11, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  What he thought is not that relevant. If you check interviews with Robert Smith of the Cure you will notice there are plenty of occasions where he becomes irate being described as goth. Here we need 3rd party sources. I noticed you added a couple, but most appear to be referring to a rock 'n' roll lifestyle as opposed to the music genre. That's not to sat that it clearly was an *inspiration* to him. I've not seen any sources yet describing Motorhead as punk. Karst (talk) 23:30, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

text:  Perhaps go through the archives - this has been debated at length. Cover versions are of little relevance here. For instance, the allmusic.com biography notes them as heavy metal and dismisses the punk claim. Please don't become a WP:GENREWARRIOR. Karst (talk) 23:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

text: *One song doesn't make a genre.  Mlpearc (open channel) 23:59, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:   You have much to learn, first thing is "what you think doesn't mean squat" Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability  Mlpearc (open channel) 23:49, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: And your clearly trying to start a battleground 'sunshine', so don't ever speak to me in such a manor again boy!. I was quite polite in my explanatory on your page, so I'd get an new attitude pretty quickly if I were you. Nuro Dragonfly (talk) 23:57, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a nice stay and good luck with your journey. Mlpearc (open channel) 00:02, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

text: Where? Karst (talk) 07:53, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genres 

message: OK, I would like there to be, some sort of, consensus about some very specific 'facts' about the band and Lemmy and how it all came about. I feel the specifics about the drug use and his arrest are an essential element to the story, because without the Canadian boarder arrest he would have stayed in Hawkwind, he has stated a few time over the years. The 'genre' issue; I think I found more than enough evidence to at the least add rock n roll. So what does everybody else think? Becuase now it is being changed somewhat in a way I think is not having the proper amount of info about the band, which really means Lemmy, in a lot of ways, and not just because I was up at 09:30am, here in Sydney, on a Sunday, with a whiskey in hand, watching his funeral streamed live either...nothing to do with it.. Nuro msg me 01:09, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Motörhead. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.motorheadphones.com/en/about/motorhead
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090111232758/https://www.acerecords.co.uk:80/content.php?page_id=59&release=7654 to http://www.acerecords.co.uk/content.php?page_id=59&release=7654
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:55, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Cleaned/corrected the lines that referred to where the band first practiced/formed in 1975 - Sound Management - a rehearsal studio in Kings Road, Chelsea. I don't have a 3rd party source to cite for the studio name or location, I was personally at Sound Management several times about the time Lemmy first practiced with Motorhead.Indieshack (talk) 13:46, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  When band first formed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Motörhead. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://playlouder.com/feature/%2Blemmy/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.imotorhead.com/past_tour_dates.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120308091025/http://amplified.tv/2011/01/17/motorhead-mastodon-in-flames-and-parkway-drive-join-sonisphere-line-up/ to http://amplified.tv/2011/01/17/motorhead-mastodon-in-flames-and-parkway-drive-join-sonisphere-line-up/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110712092656/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=160515 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=160515
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100202041721/http://wordmagazine.co.uk/content/podcast-with-a-man-whose-records-are-worth-much-your-house-probably to http://www.wordmagazine.co.uk/content/podcast-with-a-man-whose-records-are-worth-much-your-house-probably
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Motörhead. 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://web.archive.org/web/20120320055124/http://www.imotorhead.com/mhspeaks/99jun20.htm to http://www.imotorhead.com/mhspeaks/99jun20.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070309155934/http://www.fortunecity.com/lavendar/hawkslane/231/yo21.html to http://www.fortunecity.com/lavendar/hawkslane/231/yo21.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713021451/http://imotorhead.com/tour.cfm to http://www.imotorhead.com/tour.cfm
*Added  tag to http://imotorhead.com/2014/02/14/motorhead-summer-tour-dates-released/
*Added  tag to http://imotorhead.com/2015/02/25/in-the-studio/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Motörhead. 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://web.archive.org/web/20090815080547/http://www.officialdamned.com/ to http://www.officialdamned.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091105022000/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=129659 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.Net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=129659
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111108222337/http://www.lemmymovie.co.uk/album.html to http://www.lemmymovie.co.uk/album.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150330074903/http://imotorhead.com/2014/03/11/motorheads-motorboat-to-also-feature-megadeth-anthrax-more/ to http://imotorhead.com/2014/03/11/motorheads-motorboat-to-also-feature-megadeth-anthrax-more/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070114023541/http://www.imotorhead.com/specialfeatures/petagno.htm to http://www.imotorhead.com/specialfeatures/petagno.htm
*Added  tag to http://newsroom.mtv.com/2011/03/01/triple-h-motorhead/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160125091236/http://www.unratedmagazine.com/articles/Archive/2009/Motorhead_Lemmy.cfm to http://www.unratedmagazine.com/articles/Archive/2009/Motorhead_Lemmy.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:58, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)