Talk:Cradle of Filth/Archive 1

message: if you open your eyes cradle of filth has toured with bands like emperor and dimmu borgir and never has been seen that any community shuns them if they are not black metal covenant,dimmu borgi,old man's child and many other norwegian bands ore not black metal and cradle of filth is related to many norwegian black metal bands.
metal archive web site knows them as black metal and extreme gothic metal all music knows them as key artist of blackmetal real rhapsody too all music website knows the as black metal band.
what the hell is brutal death metal and stuff like that.
they are a true black metal band. - unsigned comment by 
:That settles that then.  Thanks for clearing it up.  And here's us having a massive debate for a year, and people writing "gothic" and "extreme" all over the page every day.  Who knew it was that simple?  Just imagine: someone who doesn't even sign in solving all the page's problems just like that!  I'm so relieved.  Cardinal Wurzel 17:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, that was mean of me, since it seems English isn't your first language.  But it's silly to just say "there is no genre dispute".  Clearly there is - just read this page!  Have a look at my most recent reply to Andy (above) - that's a good way to understand my idea.  I've never argued for my own opinion - I've always argued for neutrality.  Have a good weekend!  Cardinal Wurzel 08:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The page is completely sourced, under a section called "references", most of which go with black, but some say extreme, extreme gothic, death...  The dispute is certainly not just on this page.  Here's what I wrote to Andy yesterday that you don't seem able to find:  "A couple of hundred people on the Last FM site voted that they're death metal, and while most metal sites that list them go with some sort of black, if you follow the threads on most black metal message boards (eg at blackmetal.co.uk or even Cradle's own on their official site) a lot of black metal fans will have nothing to do with them, and the Observer interview with Mayhem that I put in the references (which is really good by the way, check it out) describes the black metal scene in such a way as to make it sound like somewhere Cradle clearly don't belong."  Plus, you're new here, so you probably don't know how often the main page gets changed to "gothic" and "extreme".  There are a lot of people out there who disagree with you, and their opinions are equally as valid as yours.  Our job is to keep opinions OFF Wikipedia and simply report facts.  It is NOT a fact that Cradle are a black metal band.  It IS a fact that very many people do not accept cradle as a black metal band.  I'm sorry you still don't understand.  And once again, I am NOT ARGUING FOR MY OWN OPINION.  I AM ARGUING FOR A NEUTRAL STANCE.  If you actually READ THE WHOLE PAGE instead of just the first line, you'll see we're dealing with it as fairly as possible.  What I suggest you do is go on some black metal messageboards and ask the people there what they think of Cradle.  I promise you, it'll be a shitstorm - have fun!  Cardinal Wurzel 09:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  cardinal the last comment was made by me. yes i am new here but didnt make the first two comments. i was just saying its better to leave it as debated so that everyone can see the debate. why are you snapping at me for something someone else said? - unsigned comment by 
I'm so sorry - You didn't sign your message so I thought it was the same guy again, talking to me!  Oh good, does that mean he's gone?!  Cardinal Wurzel 19:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Who was that masked man?  Cardinal Wurzel 23:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hahahahaha, rofl, just like AOL... right as you get something good you hear "Goodbye!" --Andy Blak 23:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  There Is no genre dispute cradle is a true symphonic black metal band  

message: Now, I consider myself the leading expert on all kinds of metal genres but I don't think CoF are an extreme gothic metal band, a black metal band or a symphonic black metal or any kind of crap like that.
Simply put, I see them as a metal band who adopt an image of goth/evil/horror in order to draw attention to their image, not unlike Slipknot.
I see this as typical of bands who don't actually care about the music but more obsessed with how they look in the public's eyes.
I see them as manufactured and designed to sell to the impressionable early teens of the Kerrang/MTV generation of "metal" heads and "goths"...those who listen to Cradle in order to 'fit in' to the rebellious mainstream goth fad.
If you had to classify this band in a un-biased way then it'd have to be "metal" and just leave it as that, since they don't conform to any other genre by definition. --Jeff24 21:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not heavy metal which is the actual name for the genre? Also, other than the use of "metal" instead of Heavy metal, which is a small thing I admit, I totally agree with you. Wildnox 21:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When I think of heavy metal I think of Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Metallica and other truly classic NWOBHM bands. That's why I opted for the non-specific metal classicfication. Makes sense right? --Jeff24 21:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do see you point, that's actually been my point of debate for using other genres in other articles. It's just that the article metal has nothing to do with music, and everything to do with the element. Maybe list the genre as metal so that is shows up as metal but still refers to an article about a genre instead of a type of element?Wildnox 21:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah yes I see now...well while that looks right it links to the wrong genre...so we're going round in circles! --Jeff24 21:38, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno, the thing is heavy metal, as wikipedia lists it, is more of a blanket genre, which is very broad, including a wide variety of subgenres. I'm not sure if there is a good solution to this problem, but metal is about the best idea I have. Wildnox 21:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose there is no other alternative right now. But go ahead. It'll have to do :) (p.s. I likes the way you thinks! Why not add me to myspace? --Jeff24 21:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't use my myspace all that much but why not, just send a request to my page Wildnox 21:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre dispute: An unsolvable problem? 

message: This term is a non notable, neologism created by one website, and it is not widely used.
On, Google.com a search for..
"Cradle of Filth" "Extreme Gothic Metal" returns only 1,350 results.
"Burzum" "Boyband" returns more results with 2,690 results.
Thus it should be removed from the "genre" section. - Deathrocker 14:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Er... 1,350 sounds rather a lot to me.  Plus the section explicitly says "the term is not widely accepted".  It's just one example of many.  It works in the context of the section.  Your Google statistics are ever so interesting though.  Cardinal Wurzel 18:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: That's the point.  Cardinal Wurzel 13:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, just rearranged it slightly.  I think the point is clearer now.  Cardinal Wurzel 13:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

text: It's probably the best way of describing the band's style, but it isn't a valid genre or subgenre, and isn't that widely used.  Where was it in the article anyway? The genre controversy section, or did someone actually put it in the band's template? Ours18 00:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Extreme Gothic Metal"

message: WTF! CoF is heavy metal? You mussst be having a laugh! It's "symphonic black metal"  for fucks sake! Extreme Gothic metal wouldn't be too wrong either. You lot do spout a lot of shit sometimes.
- Azeurus-
:Try reading the talk above, there is heavy dispute on what exactly they are, so maybe you shouldn't be spouting POV shit. The Haunted Angel (The Forest Whispers My Name) 18:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  HEAVY METAL? hahahahaha 

message: "Debated" is not a genre.  We should at least add something along the lines of "hard rock" or "heavy metal", for the benefit of the completely ignorant.  We could then add something like, "(specific subgenre is debated)". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.238.170.154 (talk) 04:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hence, debated. ≈ The Haunted Angel (The Forest Whispers My Name) 16:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

text: All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  All work and no..........  Cardinal Wurzel 21:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ... Erm... dude? You feeling ok? ≈ The Haunted Angel (The Forest Whispers My Name) 22:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Because that would be paradoxical. Leaving it as debated if the best choice. --Dexter prog 15:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Possible, you do make a valid point, but to me it looks as if that just has "POV" written all over it. Besides, who are we to make a new genre? ≈ The Haunted Angel //The Forest Whispers My Name// 14:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leaving "debated" as the genre 

message: It's not that hard to figure out their genre. In the genre section just put the following-
Debated: Black metal (early)Extreme Gothic metal (present)
:Genre discussions archive.  Top right.  Cardinal Wurzel 20:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not that easy to figure out their genre, I'm afraid -- it is debated and remain so for as long as the band exists, even Dani has expressed his indecision (and uncaring) for the band genre. ≈ The Haunted Angel (The Forest Whispers My Name) 00:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, personally I would say to just leave it as debated, and link to the section; let people know about it, and let them draw their own conclusions if they can't be pigeon-holed. --Dayn 16:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly, Dayn called it. ≈ The Haunted Angel (The Forest Whispers My Name) 16:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ok, People. 

message: Cradle of Filth's genre has gone from respectable black metal to emo garbage thanks to (A.A.S....American Anchor Syndrome) with a hint of MTV fame. A.A.S starts when a foreign band gains enough fame and noriety in america that MTV takes notice and gets them on the air. emedietly americas youth has a new fad soon the band, to appease thier new following they begin joint work on a album with a weak main stream artist. when it finally is released it sucks and they're original fans stop listening to them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Provokerofcoherentthought (talk • contribs) 03:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Emo? Right, I'll ignore that! And no, the genre won't be changed to anything just yet, and possibly ever. ≈ The Haunted Angel //The Forest Whispers My Name// 21:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "respectable black metal"? oh ye of little wit... Isilioth 09:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Genre and clasification 

message: thus anchoring the band to a flimsy fan base. 
-demos1»4: black metal  
-the priciple of evil made flesh: norwegien stylized black metal   
to be continued —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Provokerofcoherentthought (talk • contribs) 03:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Above, the band's own indecisiveness was cited as a primary reason to not have a definite genre listed. Per their biography , I believe Extreme Metal is an appropriate classification. If nobody disputes this, I'll go ahead and make the appropriate change. ZachPG 17:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Wow. I read through that and tried to think of something original that might solve this but I'm at a loss. How does something like this actually get resolved? (unsigned by ZachPG)
You step back from making definitive statements and just report the argument.  Cardinal Wurzel 21:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Hmm. Got it. Thanks for fixing my last post, forgot to sign it. ZachPG 22:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Genre and clasification 

message: "Their format differs from most Norwegian black metal..." Well one would expect that, really, considering they're a British band. So why this out of the blue comparison? Why not say their format differs from American black metal? Or Chinese? Now the beginning just acts as a weird transition to a list of Norwegian metal bands, which this article supposedly isn't about.
:Acording to fans of black metal, from all over the world, the Norway is "the only place were good black metal band born", cradle of filth is constantly labeled as black metal, the big majority of black metal bands are Norwegian, and you can't say that cradle of filth sounds like dimmu borgir, or zyclon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 189.164.153.147 (talk) 05:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd comparison 

message: OK kids. Read this. Cradle of Filth ARE NOT BLACK METAL. Anyone who says/thinks they are, clearly knows extremely little about black metal. Your reasoning for calling them black metal? Why you probably think theyre BM: -Dani screams. They dress liek soo goth and evil.- whatever.
This does not change the fact that they are not black metal. If I had to classify them, I would call them heavy metal with gothic influence. Just because dani screams does not make it black metal. God, hardcore bands scream. Emo bands scream. Instead of calling them black metal, why not just get a badge/flag/tattoo saying you know nothing about black metal?
Also, to all you morons who think you can argue this, Dimmu Borgir have not been black metal since 1996 or so. They are also just heavy metal with unclean vocals. Isilioth
:I know they don't play black metal, but I think a bigger reason why some people believe so isn't the screamed vocals, but rather their occasional use of "evil" and "satanic" imagery. Plus those infamous t-shirts don't really help. Trying to convince the general populace that what CoF plays is NOT black metal is unfortunately something of a Sisyphean task. (Sorry if that last sentence sounds elitist, it's unintentional) --x-Flare-x{Talk) 09:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 10 Years ago, the band would have been called Black Metal. Dani explains this in an interveiw - how there were some bands who were totally unlike today's BM, yet were still called it. One band had wierd ambience crap going on, another just had drums and bass; no guitar. Even Thornograohy would have been called BM then. By today's standards however, their music isn't BM (at least not the music within the past 10 years), and their genre forever remains debated. ≈ The Haunted Angel //The Forest Whispers My Name// 09:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In their early days, they were never "raw, traditional black metal". That is just ridiculous. They were a gothic/black band. To call them "traditional" black metal is, frankly, wrong. You probably guess I dislike the band. I don't care if people want to label them as being black metal in their early years (I wouldn't call them that myself though), but to state that they were "raw, traditional" bm in an encyclopedia is just absurd. While I think it should (in the intro) say a gothic/black hybrid, it should at least only say black metal. There is absolutely no reason or need to say "raw, traditional". Isilioth 10:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CoF ARE NOT BLACK METAL 

message: I don't know if this is still going on but I see a lot of band discussions arguing over a certain bands genre. This is partly due to bands progressing and changing music style. Why don't you just state what kind of music they WERE and then maybe what kind they are NOW? Like Exploited. Just a though. Simple and clean. (-Kid. 16:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, we do.  Just not in the first line or the infobox, which are apparently the only parts anybody ever reads.  Cardinal Wurzel 18:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Extreme Symphonic Gothic Blackened Operatic Folk-Enthused Death Metal Maurauth 11:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think no matter who you are Cradle's genre is gonna be different, but honestly I think its hard to give an extreme genre classification (ex death metal, black metal...) to a band who is really creative and ever changing. I'm one who'd rather stick to the basics of names (ex rock, metal, classical) and just classify them as metal. Because no matter what, you really can't go wrong with that name. 
216.201.194.106 16:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Ha, that one sounds best. Metal. (-Kid. 15:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: *sigh* But you're misreading the paragraph.  It's doesn't say that Cradle ARE those things - the point is that they are all and none of those things, and that's it all down to point of view and personal opinion.  It says "at one time or another Cradle have been labelled this, this, this, this and this".  It doesn't matter if only one person said it about only one song.  The point is that it's been said somewhere.  The point is that the WHOLE DEBATE IS FUCKING STUPID.  We're not trying to pin them down to particular genres, we're trying to point out that 50 different people will think 50 different things, and that it's unsolveable.  Cardinal Wurzel 12:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

text: with that logic, i could say that they are techno... and it would be in the article...
74.12.181.2 02:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

text: No you couldn't, since they have no aspects of techno music in their sound. Also as wiki is based on consensus, there is no consensus for the other genres, but there would be a consensus AGAINST techno. Maurauth (talktome)(wha?) 07:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

text: they have made dance remixes of their songs... does that not at least qualify for some sort of electronic music. i was just using this as an example but the links that are given are not reliable sources or one song from one album is deemed one genre, thus the band is this one genre.
74.14.121.225 20:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Which dance remixes?! ≈ Maurauth (09F9) 20:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Ohh hahahahaha. I'd hardly call those Dance, more like Coldwave, (Industrial Metal). ≈ Maurauth (09F9) 09:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

text: i give up... no point in arguing. it is too transfixed in one's mind... thanks for assuming im a he. 74.12.180.43 01:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right that there's no point in arguing which specific subgenre they should be labelled as. There will never be agreement. That's why we decided long ago that Wikipedia's place is to describe the argument, not take a side in it. --Stormie 02:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre 

message: Hey, would it be okay if I could change their genre from "Metal" to "Extreme Metal"?  I just don't want anybody thinking that CoF plays the same genre as Black Sabbath.
Black Sabbath was considered 'extreme' (whatever that means) in its day no doubt, CoF, CoC Slayer etc..all come into the genre of metal and its infinite to describe the various types of metal from Black Metal, Hair Metal, Shock-Rock, Nu-Metal, Rap Metal, funkMetal ad infinitum......  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.246 (talk) 19:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read the bit right there at the top, as well as the genre part of the article to explain why you can't exactly. Although most of the genre's that we have debated that they are come under Extreme Metal, I think it'd still be POV to not count in their "Gothic metal" arguments... heavy metal is as small a genre we can get to fit everything in. True, they don't play the same as Sabbath, but they are both members of the same "parent" genre. ≈ The Haunted Angel 15:19, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

text: But the Wikipedia article does not display what "everyone knows", it displays facts that can be verified to be facts by reliable sources, and it does not display particular persons' opinions on the band's genre. Sebi [talk] 05:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

text: If you look at the specific album pages, you'll see the first few albums and demos have been given specific genres, but are still debated for the most part - after Vempire, it gets a bit difficult to give them a genre. ≈ The Haunted Angel 10:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Metal Genre" 

message: Should some reference to the band's early/demo stages as a death metal band be mentioned?  Obviously it's a genre they're not associated with at all currently, but the way the article reads now would lead one to believe they started as a black metal band; there's really no note of the musical changes which took place before the first few demos and first album.  Despite all the arguments over their later genre affiliations, I don't think anyone could argue that the 3 demos prior to "Total Fucking Darkness" are anything but death metal.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.21.190.132 (talk) 07:45:40, August 2, 2007 (UTC) 
I agree- the first demos were death metal with some thrash and may be little early black metal elements.
I think it should be written in the genre section:
Death metal (first demos)
Black Metal,Melodic Black Metal (early)
Extreme Metal (disputed subgenres) - now 
Xr 1 10:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now given them a death metal mention under the genre section. ≈ The Haunted Angel 13:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early death metal period? 

message: OK, as I said above, I do think that the mention of a genre by the band and their record label is more significant than the average random genre labelling.
Here's my proposal for a rearranged "Genre" section.
:Cradle of Filth's first three demos bore a death metal feel, with occasional symphonic elements
. However, when they released their fourth demo, Total Fucking Darkness, their genre became more akin to black metal. Their "true" black metal status however, has been in debate since near the time they became popular
, with some dismissing them for a perceived lack of credibility, along with bands such as Dimmu Borgir whose success followed in Cradle's wake.
 Dani, in a 1998 interview for BBC Radio 5 for example, said "I use the term heavy metal, rather than black metal, because I think that's a bit of a fad now.  Call it what you like: death metal, black metal, any kind of metal...",
 while Gavin Baddeley's 2006 Terrorizer interview states that "few folk, the band included, call Cradle black metal these days."Terrorizer magazine, November 2006  
:Their format differs from most black metal, and they have thus, at one time or another, been labeled symphonic black metal;
 extreme gothic metal;
 melodic black metal;
 satanic metal;
 vampyric metal;
 speed metal;
 death metal;
 brutal death metal;
 melodic death metal
 and horror metal,
 some of which are regarded by critics and fans alike as entirely apocryphal categories. Appearing on the BBC music quiz Never Mind the Buzzcocks on April 9 2001, Dani jokingly claimed Cradle's sound as "heavy funk".
:However, the band's evolving sound has allowed them to continue resisting definitive categorisation. They are audibly influenced by Iron Maiden, have collaborated on projects like Christian Death's Born Again Anti-Christian album (on the track "Peek-A-Boo"), and have even dabbled outside of metal music with dance remixes ("Twisting Further Nails", "Pervert's Church" etc), although these have fallen by the wayside in recent years. In a 2006 interview with Terrorizer magazine, current guitarist Paul Allender said "We were never a black metal band. The only thing that catered to that was the make-up. Even when The Principle of Evil Made Flesh came out — you look at Emperor and Burzum and all that stuff — we didn't sound anything like that. The way that I see it is that we were, and still are now, an extreme metal band."
:As at November 2007, the band describe themselves as "the world's finest dark metal band" in the bio on their official MySpace page.
, but ultimately, as Dani Filth stated in an October 2006 interview, "We'd rather be known as solely 'Cradle of Filth', I think, rather than be hampered by stupid genre barriers."
Any comments or objections? --Stormie 00:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An interesting note, is that it seems that the internet's supply of information on "dark metal" comes from this website. Go ahead and type "dark metal" into Google - you get a few results from Wikipedia and Wikipedia in different languages (I've noticed you only get other languages when there are few results anyway), everything else seems to be about black and death metal - I can't see any true sites about dark metal other than our article. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 01:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First, on myspace you can't put the label "dark metal," Cardinal.  Second I agree it should have a sentence of its own when the bands own recording label is calling them as such.  Third the reason you can't find shit about it, is because it's not a real genre thus far, but more a label for bands that mix elements of black and gothic metal. Navnløs 18:05, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: My view is: "Don't fix it if it's not broken" - it's taken years to decide on a genre for CoF, what has suddenly made us want to change it again? The genre should stay as it is and any other terms are just WP:POV. ScarianTalk 23:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree; leave it be. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 23:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, first, Cardinal: yes, the first can be discounted, the second is not gospel if it only appeared on the myspace page, no, but it is worth mentioning as it is on their recording company's offical bio of the band.  Second, Scarian:  I appreciate what you are saying, and like I said once before, I'm not neccesarily asking for the genre to be changed in the music infobox, ok?  I am asking that the whole dark metal thing, what with it appearing on roadrunner records site of the official bio of CoF, deserves at least a sentence.  I mean, I don't get it, do you people realize that that sentence was there for quite a while originally, and then someone pointed it out to me that it had no citation, and I took it upon myself to find one (which I failed in anyways), and now that it does have a citation, you get rid of the sentence.  It at least deserves a sentence, thats all I'm saying...it won't compromise the article or cause anyone's psyche to be destroyed, and I actually have a somewhat good reason behind making it into a sentence, and I'm working pretty hard here and ALL I want is one small sentence. Navnløs 23:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I didn't remove your comment - I think there was an edit conflict; you and I posted at the same time. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 00:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First, I apologize to the Haunted Angel for accusing him of deleting my comment, when apparently it was an accident.  Secondly, I no longer care about the other crap.  Over a couple days, I thought to myself "why the fuck do I even care, I don't even like the band."  Someone else put the sentence in there and I just kinda took up their battle for some reason. I mean, CoF has some decent stuff, but they suck compared to a lot of other black metal bands and metal bands in general, in my opinion.  The only thing they ever had going for them was Dani's unusually high voice. Third, what free image you talking about, Cardinal? Navnløs (talk) 00:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apology accepted - don't worry about it. Although saying CoF suck is blasphemy of the highest kind. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 00:09, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and I believe Cardinal reffers to a free picture of the band for the article. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 00:12, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fresh piping hot jam donut - a proposal 

message: Saying they've been described as brutal death metal is ridiculous. It is fairly apparent that whoever authored the page cited had no clue what brutal death metal is, or even death metal. I suggest they listen to some actual brutal death metal bands, I suggest Sikfuk. The page was not one of journalistic integrity, but instead appeared to be written by some random guy (as evidenced by the pooooor site design)... Perhaps the person who gave the cite?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.201.181 (talk) 11:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, well, to be fair, the point that "a whole bunch of critics have labelled them with a whole bunch of labels" would be made a little more strongly if all the references were to reviewers of slightly more notable stature than that brutal death metal one. --Stormie (talk) 23:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: JAM DONUT Go listen to "Human Waste" or "Effigy of the Forgotten" by Suffocation, "Cranial Impalement" by Disgorge (US) or even "Tomb of the Mutilated" by Cannibal Corpse, then tell me Cradle of Filth sounds anything like brutal death metal.  If the opinion of anybody with a hosted website is considered a valid reference for a Wikipedia article, then I might have to consider getting my own website.  I could misinform people like this article does!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.132.183 (talk) 01:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, you miss the point. We're not saying they sound like brutal death metal, we're saying that their genre has been debated upon, and this is one of the many labels they have been branded. ≈ The Haunted Angel 01:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: You don't understand how Wikipedia works. Content is dictated by verifiability not truth. In this case, you say to 'go away and listen to the albums'; in Wikipedia-speak this constitutes original research. What you need is a reliable, third-party source. I wish more people on Wikipedia in general could get their heads round this point as most genre-debates revolve around people loudly asserting their POV but never bothering to find reliable sources. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 11:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Blackmetalbaz pretty much summed it up there; but I'll just add this - please do not change the genre in any of their stuff at all. You may be sure you know what the genre is, but your view is not set in stone. It is not our duty to declare what we think their genre is, it is instead our duty to show that it is disputed, and to show the links that would say it is a variety of different genres. Although you were only trying to do the right thing, please note that this is a very touchy subject, and there have been vandals who would change their genre even after we have told them why it should remain ambiguous, and they ended up getting banned; please do not become one of them. ≈ The Haunted Angel 19:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I think you miss the point; this has been discussed so many times in the past that now no matter what we call them aside from "extreme metal", it is POV. It is not our job to label Cradle one thing or another, but to show that they have been called these things over a period of time; it's POV to say that they are one thing or another, and if we add one genre that they've been called, we'd have to add them all. ≈ The Haunted Angel 19:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brutal Death Metal 

message: Hey kids, better rid of the information on Cradle of Filth on the gothic metal page about them being "gothic black metal". I realized we're puritanising the genres of anything more specific so I figured this was a good step. ;]
Jotsko (talk) 10:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Which bit do you mean? I found the line "During the mid-1990s, Moonspell and Cradle of Filth brought the gothic approach to black metal" - personally I think that line is alright, as it's not saying that they are the genre "gothic black metal" or whatever, and instead is describing their approach to gothic metal. ≈ The Haunted Angel 11:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Dimmu Borgir does not sound anything like Cradle of Filth, nor do they play the same style anymore. Cradle of Filth does not fit into one genre, but rather envelopes many genres. Dimmu Borgir is Symphonic Black Metal or just extreme metal. CoF is Gothic Black Metal or just extreme metal. They sound nothing alike. Undead Warrior (talk) 02:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, Dimmu and Cradle sound worlds apart, frankly. And no, Cradle are not at all true black metal. Listen to Mayhem or Immortal or Gorgoroth, for example, and realise they sound nothing like Cradle. ≈ The Haunted Angel 12:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

text: You are missing the point. Cradle of Filth didn't even start out as black metal. They were death metal. I have their first demo's and can easily tell they are no where near black metal. Their only album close to black metal would have been Cruelty and the Beast. The studio albums leading to it still traced large amounts of death metal, and the ones after it started to break away from any discernible genre. Undead Warrior (talk) 15:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

text: If you truly have the old demo's, including Orgiastic Pleasures Foul, you would see how they are death metal. Early 90's black metal is different than it is now, but still the same in areas. Cradle of Filth started out as a death metal band. If you don't believe me, ask Dani himself. There is a general consensus that Cradle's first demos WERE death metal, and not black metal. Their new stuff is nothing like black metal either. Undead Warrior (talk) 02:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better knock down the Gothic Metal 

message: Jam. DOnUt.
Shouldn't this be added to the genre box? Almost all of their albums incorporate symphonic elements, with their newer albums having, what, a 23 piece orchestra performing the symphonics?  Extreme Metal makes it seem like any other extreme act.. 
:Or just give my a reason why that symphonic metal (specifically) is not by itself stated as a genre the band plays, aside from the labes of sympho-deathmetal and sympho-blackmetal listed.72.72.212.58 (talk) 01:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You do make a valid point; adding symphonic metal wouldn't violate WP:POV in any way - however, I want to see what any other editors have to say about the subject. I'm for the change, if we get enough agreement. Oh, and I believe only Damnation and a Day uses an orchestra - rest of the time it's a keyboard. ≈ The Haunted Angel 02:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

text: The Prague Philharmonic Orchestra featured on the Nymphetamine album magnius (talk) 01:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Oh of course - I wasn't doubting that any of their other stuff was symphonic - not at all; I was just remarking that I thought only Damnation featured an actual orchestra -- I'll have to check, but I'm certain that the Prague Orchestra was on Damnation, not Nymphetamine. I could be mistaken however, I will have to check. Still, you do rightly point out that pretty much all their material is symphonic - synthesised or not; so we'll just see if anyone else agrees or disagrees with this notion to change. ≈ The Haunted Angel 00:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  They're on both albums I think, I know they are on Damnation, and they were used again for either Thornogrophy or Nymphetmine...and I am pretty sure it was the latter magnius (talk) 01:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

text: From the sleeve notes:
*Nymphetamine: "Orchestral passages arranged and mixed by the maestrosity Daniel Presley, perfrmed by the Vulgarian Philharmonic".  The Bulgarian Philharmonic, or a joke?
*Thornography: "Orchestral passages arranged and mixed by Daniel Presley".  No mention of any actual orchestra, and listed right after the keyboards.
*Godspeed: "Sinfonia and keys by Mark Newby Robinson".  Again no mention of an orchestra.  Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 08:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, my mistake though. I know that the song "Under Pregnant Skies..." on Thornography was performed mostly by some of the members of Angtoria and I think, their families. Anyway, back to the point in question! Should symphonic metal be added? ≈ The Haunted Angel 13:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

text: As the Cardinal said, we use an umbrella term in the infobox and explain in detail elsewhere. For example, the "Sony interlude" section, discussing Damnation and a Day, says "Sony's heavyweight funding underwriting Cradle's undiminished ambition by finally bringing a real orchestra into the studio (the 80-strong Budapest Film Orchestra and Choir replacing the increasingly sophisticated synthesizers of previous albums) and thus marking the band's belated gestation - for one album only - into full-blown symphonic metal". Some detail should be added regarding Godspeed on the Devil's Thunder, I think all mention of it in this article predates the actual release of the album. --Stormie (talk) 03:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Symphonic Metal 

message: Cradle of Filth should absolutely be listed under Black Metal. That's truly what they are, not only from my personal point of view, but from that of the band themselves. They clearly list themselves as Black Metal on their MySpace page, and are undoubtedly listed as the same on any other site. There may be a genre dispute, but Black Metal is the base of every song by CoF. Extreme Metal hardly describes them at all, it can give false premise to anyone reading about them who hasn't quite heard them. EternalRyche July 4, 2009, 10:55 AM
Go listen to Marduk or Mayhem and get back to me on that :P They're not black metal, at least not the stuff they've put out in the last decade.  How would "extreme metal" give someone a false premise to someone reading the article? Do they not know what "Extreme Heavy Metal" is? If not, then they probably won't be looking up CoF's wiki page.  The "genre" section does a decent enough explanation of what kind of music they play.Zaruyache (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 20:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Genre 

message: im adding Heavy Funk because i remember him saying on the Buzzcocks that they where Heavy Funk  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.254.143 (talk) 17:13, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heavy Funk 

message: The content of the opening sentence "The band's musical style evolved from black metal to a cleaner and more "produced" amalgam of gothic metal, symphonic black metal and other extreme metal styles..." is questionable. As a "connoisseur" of heavy metal I would say they have gone from something resembling death metal with symphonic and black metal elements into an mix of gothic metal, traditional heavy metal and symphonic black metal. This is not a sourced statement, but as there is alot of confusion in the world of heavy metal genre, I would say alot of sources are not reliable even if they are published and reputable.
In conclusion the sentance should be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.16.49.73 (talk) 12:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening sentence 

message: I know this has been discussed here much, and extreme metal has been decided on as the infobox genre to maximize neutrality, but in my opinion, it is inaccurate. Gothic metal, which the band has been labelled a lot, generally isn't considered "extreme". In a way, calling the band "extreme metal" isn't neutral either, as some people are quite opinionated as to what exactly that constitutes. I suggest to change it to "extreme metal, dark metal", since dark metal is defined as a "fusion of extreme metal and gothic metal", which I think summarizes the band's style more appropriately.--MASHAUNIX 05:40, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Been there. Talked about that. But thanks for your input. Been a while since any of us had this conversation. I almost miss it. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 23:14, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: So do you not agree that the current infobox genre doesn't summarise their style appropriately, as it doesn't cover gothic metal (which they have often been labelled) at all?--MASHAUNIX 16:14, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: My personal position is that genre labels are nothing but stupid and anal, and the more subdivisions you descend into, the more stupid and anal they get. In terms of this page, what we found during the Dark Years Of The Genre War, which you luckily seem to have missed, is that if you specify any particular genre for this band, someone takes issue with it and it all kicks off again. If you start putting 'gothic' or 'dark' or whatever else you personally think they sound like, I guarantee it will get changed by an anon who thinks they're black metal. And then the black metal brigade will have a tantrum because they hate this band and change it to something else. 'Extreme' turned out just to be the least worst option. Everyone seems OK with the notion that Cradle play some vague sort of extreme metal, and since it got left there the page has actually been really stable. So personally, I'd request you leave it alone. Use your energy to write some content instead and don't get hung up on categories. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 18:51, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no opinion, but the only way Wikipedia can cover genres appropriately is to include information based on reliable sources. However, if you say this is stable, it doesn't really matter. So yeah, I'll forget it.--MASHAUNIX 22:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's the trouble - there aren't really any reliable sources; just blow-hard interbloggers with opinions (not meaning you). The band don't engage with the issue (if it is an issue). The only place people really argue about it is on Wikipedia! Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extreme metal 

message: I think that when it comes to the genre, we should it put like Encyclopedia Metallum did, they kinda know better. MaggotSupremacy555 (talk) 11:56, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre according to Encyclopedia Metallum 

message: Recently, Evanescence and Celtic Frost, 2 bands that didn't get any genres added to their genre field, just got genres added to their genre field. Sometimes genre debates over bands go down. HIM is another band that couldn't have their own genre field but now do. I think we can do it with Cradle of Filth. Some people don't like to call Dimmu Borgir black metal but they're still black metal (symphonic black metal, specifically). Metallum were able to call Cradle of Filth's older stuff black metal. Genres added to the genre field will be sourced genres. Lets see how it goes. Statik N (talk) 23:57, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre field can be given genres? 

message: "Extreme metal" isn't cited in the article. Why aren't the cited genres listed? RockabillyRaccoon (talk) 11:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: See the #FAQ at the top of this page. — Czello 12:07, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

text: No it isn't. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 13:28, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genres