Talk:List of Christian metal artists/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Notability

There has today been a lot of new articles created that have been linked from this page. They have all been deleted because they were either copyvios, or did not express notability. Just a friendly note, before anyone else wastes their time creating articles only for them to be deleted 20 minutes later. The JPS ^{talk to me} 20:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC) Dream Theater isn't christian indeed... However, John Petrucci, the guitar player from Dream Theater is Christian, but that doesn't make the band christian...

Citations Needed

I believe many of these bands need citations. I have been a follower of the CM scene since I was 7 years old (20 years later...) and haven't heard of many of these bands. This list should be reserved to bands that are significant in some manner, not just an everyday garage band. --One Redeemer 19:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Iamvery

Black Metal bands

I've added quiet a few black metal bands... most of them you probably have never heard of... before you delete them, go look them up, I spent hours researching them, they're all safe =] Roozbenjrox 13:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, quite a few of the bands I added are from Europe, Mexico, etc. So the lyrics are in Spanish/Ukraine etc. not English, does anyone think we should have non-English bands? Roozbenjrox 13:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

There is no such thing as Christian 'black metal'. Even if 'Christian metal' is not an oxymoron, Christian 'black metal' certainly is. Especially if they are 'safe'. Add them, by all means, if they are notable, but do not call them 'black metal'. The Crying Orc 15:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Then what do we call them? Unblack Metal, White Metal? Sounds stupid to me, it's just a name. They have almost every element of black metal, except the lyrics, so why call it something else? And how does it not exist... How many black metal bands that label themselves as Christian call themselves "White metal" or whatever suits you? Roozbenjrox 12:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I removed them, as none of them had articles. --Inhumer 06:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You can't have a black metal band with pro-Christian lyrics anymore than you can have a realist painting with unicorns in it. It's physically impossible. Ours18 17:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Says who Ours18? you? Are you the god of metal and only what you say can be metal is metal? All hail Ours18 "THE METAL GOD" - ETAC

He's wrong that Black Metal can't be Cristian. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Unblack_metal You can't argue that. --Trusader 03:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Be aware: You provided a link to a page that calls "Christian Black Metal" "UNBLACK Metal" If this is the case, then there is no such thing as "Christian Black Metal" only its variant, "Unblack Metal." It may sound cheesy, but you can't have it both ways. Jlricherson 17:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Unblack metal is another name for christian black metal. – Jerry^teps 05:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Corrected Links

I added some (band) notations to the groups whose links were to the wrong pages. I do not know whether any of these bands would have pages, maybe someone should check this out. While said person is checking it out, please to check also if they are really Christian bands. While I was at it, I removed the link to System of a Down, but not before making sure they weren't really a Christian band. A quick check of the lyrical content reassures me of this. Jlricherson 04:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I added SOAD and trust me they are Christian, look at the lyrics to Question! and Soldier Side. Also I added Flaw and someone deleted them, look at the lyrics to Whole. --Trusader 22:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

One or two songs don't make a band christian --Inhumer 02:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

So if there was a small band with only 4 songs and all contained the exact lyrics "I am Christian!" They wouldn't be christian because it is only a few songs. --Trusader 04:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Those were just a few. Chop Suey references the death of Jesus for example. Please, trust me they are christian --Trusader 19:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

No, They're not. --Inhumer 00:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, SOAD and Flaw are a Hard Rock bands, so they don't belong on the lists anyway--Inhumer 00:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia describes them as metal groups for one thing. And second give me one reason they are not christian. Just to be a nice guy I will stop adding them till we hashed this out. Now actually prove your point instead of repeatedly saying things without backing them up. --Trusader 03:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

As I have already told you, One or two songs with references to something of christian nature don't make a band christian. --Inhumer 18:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Refer to his answer to that question moron. --66.208.76.129 19:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:PA, Also, you could of just logged in and said that --Inhumer 00:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't. --Trusader 01:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

And besides that was kind-of a personal attack, saying I posted that. That isn't even my ip.--Trusader 03:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I apologize then. --Inhumer 02:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Accepted. --Trusader 03:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, if wikipedia describes them as metal it's because wikipedia doesn't properly classify bands for almost any genre. They aren't listed on the Encyclopaedia Metallum, they have been described as hard rock with slight metallic influences in numerous magazines, and I've not met a single metal fan who considers them metal. So there you have it. Not metal. And even if you go by the false definition provided by Uncle Wiki, they still aren't Christian by a long shot. "References the death of Christ?" Thousands of blatantly anti-Christian metal bands have done that. Ours18 04:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

in an interview, Daron Malakian is quoted to have said: "The song is about how when people die, they will be regarded differently depending on the way they pass. Like, if I were to die from a drug overdose, everyone would say I deserved it because I abused drugs, hence the line 'Angels deserve to die'. -From the wikipedia page for Chop Suey! --Inhumer 00:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, fine that one line. But "father in your hands I commend my spirit father in your hands hy have you forsaken me, In your eyes forsaken me, In your thoughts forsaken me In your heart forsaken me oh" Thats a reference to God (Father). --Trusader 01:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

But that's all it is, merely a reference. It doesn't support Christian moral teachings at all. If anything, it's a mockery of Jesus's last hours upon Earth, using it as a comparison for any other ordinary death---nothing special, in other words. The idea that Jesus' death wasn't special is a direct contrast with everything I was ever taught about Christianity at school---and I went to Catholic schools for 14 years. Ours18 02:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I was in Sunday school myself for about 10 years (Lutheran). I don't know if thats what SOAD meant but I see your point. Please refer downward to the other part.

I just read the lyrics to Question! and Soldier Side. Soldier Sidemay contain the word "God", but is obviously about war. Question! seems to about dreaming. --Inhumer 00:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

It actually in one line they say "Wondering when JESUS comes is he gonna be saved" of course it's about war that isn't the point. Just like arguing weather or not they are metal isn't the point, that should be done some place else. Question is about life after death. --Trusader 01:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, that IS the point. A simple mention of something Christian does not make a band Christian. That line about the return of Jesus expresses doubt of the second coming and a somewhat bitter sarcasm of Christian beliefs. Furthermore, Jesus IS saved so they are indicating there is something wrong with him. Once again, not Christian. Ours18 02:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

That wasn't my point which was the point in the first place. But nevermind I can't find any good facts to prove they are of any religion in particular so of now it's just best to leave them out. Oh, just as a side note he said When jesus comes, thats expresses no doubt as to his coming, just weather or not he can make it into heaven, which every Christian has probably felt at one point in their life. --Trusader 03:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Jesus isn't the one wondering if he's going to be saved, the soldier is. --Trusader 01:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I know a good test: read the lyrics to "F*** the System." Wow, they have to be NOT Christian. Jlricherson 17:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

SOAD

I agree, they are not Christian nor metal. I think they are more muslim then anything. Iamvery 20:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think they're Muslim either. --Inhumer 20:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

This argument is settled already. --Trusader 23:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Can music be defined as Christian?

A debate I've gotten into many times. Is it totally accurate to define a type of music as Christian? And if so, why aren't we defining other bands based on their religious beliefs? Why isn't their an "atheist metal" section at the local record shop? In some ways, I think defining a music with a Christian message as "Christian" hinders sales for bands that are just as capable if not better than their counterparts.

Technically, when it all comes down to it, music is music. It can be used in many ways, some use it to glorify God, some to glorify evil. Iamvery 20:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

When I call a band a Christian band I'm describes the people in the band not the style music. Thats why Christian Metal is still genrelized in the same subgenres as secular metal. The Christian tag is just to let people know what they are about and for fans of metal who are Christians to find bands that share snd express similar beliefs as they do. - E Tac

Sorting by genres

Would it be possible to list or organize these bands also within their subgenres to make this a more informative list or not? - E Tac

Cristian Metal is a subgenere already. --Trusader 03:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Not Really, genrelizing it only as Christian and nothing else does nothing to describe the sound of the music itself, only the people playing it and the lyrics to it. So categorizing the bands in this list also by the style of metal they play seems like a reasonable idea to me. If bands were only genrelized by their lyrical content imagine what it would be like walking into a record store. --E tac 11:16, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I see your point now. I would agree. --Trusader 00:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Metal?

A lot of the bands on this page cannot be classified as 'metal' such as Underoath, P.O.D. and especially mewithoutyou

If you think they don't belong, feel free to remove them, but be aware that others may disagree. I personally recommend removing all bands that fail to mention "christian metal" explicitly on their pages... That'd keep genre disputes where they belong, and keep them consistent throughout the encyclopaedia. --Dane ^~nya 14:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The question is what about bands that mention metalcore or nu metal? should those stay or go?--E tac 21:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, from what I've heard, they aren't considered "metal" as such. If the page mentioned christian metal, as well as the others, I would still list it for consistency, like a few other lists. For example, I'd put Trivium in both the metalcore and thrash metal lists. --Dane ^~nya 02:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that the metalcore and nu metal bands should stay in the list. Although I agree that those genres are not metal, I think that this list should have Christian bands in any subgenre of metal mentioned at list of heavy metal genres. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 02:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with that. 'Cept the related genres naturally. --Dane ^~nya 03:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I think nu-metal and metalcore are fine for the list. I was talking about the alternative, post-hardcore, and emo bands on the list Bloodredchaos 10:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I hadn't noticed that. (Then again, I was only really reading the talk page in any depth. :-) ) There's a list of Christian rock bands for them. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 14:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed a bunch of bands, some just didn't have a page, I think we should reword the sentence at the top so people refrain from adding bands who are described as hardcore and not metalcore. Also let me know if there was something I shouldn't have removed.--E tac 22:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Christian Bands and Profanity

Has anyone heard of "Beneath the Sky" and should they be in the list? All of their lyrics are positive, with "The Reason" actually about Jesus and salvation. The only problem is that on at least two songs, they use "curse words" (the f-word (but not in a vulgar way) and 'goddamned' but even Maylene and the Sons of Disaster use that, *update: MATSOD actually say "damn it all to hell"* in a non-profane way). My question is: should bands that use profanity be completely barred from the list, or can there be a Christian band with mild profanities in their lyrics? Could there be such a liberal sect of Christianity that is okay with this? Jlricherson 17:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Does the band itself consider themselves to be a "Christian" band? Trouble often wrote songs with Christian lyrics but the band never considered themselves a Christian band and they aren't listed here.--E tac 02:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Liner notes show the lead singer as professing faith in Jesus, but they don't promote themselves as a Christian band. The only problem I see with this methodology is the fact that very few Christian Metal bands go to great lengths to distinguish themselves as Christian in the marketplace. I think this is cleverly done to garner attention from the average fan, as the message boards and discussions of these bands usually fill up with profanity. Side note: if one of the main qualifiers for a band to be labeled "Christian Metal" is Christian lyrics and themes, then they would fit...otherwise, I guess you could use this formula to remove Zao as they no longer consider themselves as much a Christian band as they consider themselves a band with two Christians in it.--Jlricherson 18:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

P.O.D uses occasional minor expletives such as "ass" and "damn". - -[The Spooky One] | ^{[t c r]} 21:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

No christian band ever uses curse words. P.O.D. does not curse but some words they use sound like curse words. Beneath the Sky may have some christian background but not be a christian band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.21.223.97 (talk) 17:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

So much editing, give us a break

A lot of editing has been done here and some genres keep getting changed and artists being added. It's really hard and tiresome having to look over edits of mostly anons. For example xdeathstarx (which I may add is not on the metal-archives as being death metal, let alone not even being on it), I wonder what their real genre is but they are definitely not a pure death metal act ("Christian death metal" maybe to blame?). Also, some metalcore bands are rather more hardcore and should be on the metalcore and hardcore list instead. I'm obviously not for the hardcore stuff and "Christian metal" much but using extreme metal when a band is stated as a hardcore band? Sheesh... some people need to learn their genres or have this page protected from mass editing and have some downtime. --CircafuciX 21:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Totally agreed. ¨Here's a suggestion: how about making strict line that Christian hardcore and metalcore bands should only be added to their own article -- List of Christian hardcore punk & metalcore bands -- with the exception of bands that have had a significant impact on the Christian metal history such as P.O.D., As I Lay Dying and Demon Hunter? I'm going to write in the intro that hardcore groups belong to their own articles, let's see if that helps. --Azure Shrieker 21:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Will that line be a comment or viewable? There is also alternative metal, nu metal and even metalcore which are often debated as being "true metal". It may be best for them (alternative metal, nu metal) to remain on that page instead, unless they are near acceptable here. If that doesn't help us, I think the page should be protected to work out things a bit but thats an action only an admin could provide. --CircafuciX 22:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

You are right and like you said, it is probably best to request the page to be protected from anonymous editors if nothing else helps. While this is not as strict place as Metal-Archives, we should draw some kind of line here. Let's see what happens.--Azure Shrieker 22:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Removed metalcore and hardcore groups

To notify everyone this is what I did:

• I removed every metalcore/hardcore act that were solely those genres and nothing else. I looked at each wiki page that seemed questionable and corrected some genres.
• I removed and exchanged the hardcore/metalcore bands that were not mentioned at the list of Christian hardcore punk & metalcore bands.
• Also, I am not really sure what metalcore acts should of been kept, but someone will decide that later I guess.
• Some bands will still remain questionable as a Christian or 'metal' band.

I'm also not sure of some bands having their light of day here and some things that seem to go on here very, very often. Most core genres just don't give their way into real heavy metal and have removed the other more subtle "cores".

• xDEATHSTARx are not death metal or "extreme metal" at all... unless we're talking about the Deathstars band which if they play Christian music into their type of metal, then they would be welcome to join the ranks, but adding a band that is not even on the metal side but the hardcore side for one and naming it as a death metal/extreme metal band is another thing...
• Comeback Kid was listed as "punk metal" but was not classified as such on their wiki page.
• xDISCIPLEx A.D. was listed as "extreme metal" but was metalcore and hardcore on their wiki page.
• Point of Recognition was listed as "extreme metal" and death metal but was hardcore on their wiki page.
• Sinai Beach is not death metal.
• I saw the genres on Underoath and it's just not possible for this band to be those genres but I gave some leeway for them and added a citation for their early genres. Their genres are different from their wiki page but if they were "deathed up" back then, then they are allowed to stay here.
• Also, Skillet are questionable as passing as part of a subgenre of heavy metal with "nu metal" and saying they just have a Gothic metal influence seems just a vain attempt at adding them here as a metal band.
• Winter Solstice is a metalcore and deathcore band but I decided to leave them because of the strong death metal influence on deathcore.
• I also removed the artist East West which is a rapcore band.
• One ip anon user (67.67.69.148) is making mass edits, adding bands, capitalizing genres and also changing the band's genres from metalcore or hardcore to "extreme metal" and even death metal and "Unblack metal" when their wiki article states hardcore and then in the article it says they are influenced by metal genres (whatever they may be) and other incorrect classification on their pages.

That will sum up my edits for now. --CircafuciX (talk) 03:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Good work. There has been some complaints about whether old Underoath was metal at all. No idea if their early stuff was really death/black or just metalcore with high-pitched shrieking and death growls since there's only new material on their MySpace. If one adds a source to Underoath's genre, shouldn't there be added sources for most bands in this list as well as someone requested? Or is it enough that their wikipage say the bands are Christian and play metal? --Azure Shrieker (talk) 11:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I knew that having all the bands referenced would come up at some time. The only reliable source I know of is AMG (about 50% reliable to the metal side of the community...) [1] and can be used to reference the Christian metal bands. If Underoath don't get referenced in some time for being dm/ubm then I will simply remove them, as they are still on the Christian hardcore and metalcore list. Also, if they did combine shrieks and growls then they might qualify as a pioneer of what some people call "blackened metalcore". I also corrected one word of yours if you don't mind. --CircafuciX (talk) 14:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind. All Music Guide tags Underoath's styles as "Post-Hardcore, Screamo, Christian Metal, Punk Metal" but the entry says their early material is metalcore.[2] If we start adding references to the bands, should it qualify if one of the Allmusic tags include "Christian metal" or should their entries also say something about it? Some of the Allmusic writers, however, seem to go wrong with their tags, for example they tag As I Lay Dying as "Heavy Metal, Grindcore, Speed Metal, Thrash" while the entry says nothing about Christian metal and that they are a "metal-hardcore crossover band." [3]. How about Rock Detector by Sharpe-Yung? [4] It tags some bands with "Christian metal" and is quite well-known but is it considered reliable? --Azure Shrieker (talk) 16:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

All Music Guide is considered a "reliable source" but if this wasn't an encyclopedia which is based on whatever the media/pros say, then I would never believe their labels. They don't even label death metal bands and black metal bands separately and they have a couple genres that need to be added because some are getting rather popular like melodic death/black metal and metalcore and deathcore. Although, I trust to a higher degree of what they actually say in the biography so now I think Underoath may get the boot but I'll wait for a ref awhile. And the reason why I didn't include Rock Detector was because some consider it unreliable and some do because the creator is a respected musician in the metal community and some genres they provide seem to be more dead on to the point of actually adding the more specific genres. I saw what AILD was labeled as on AMG just before but the rockdetector site [5] showed what they "truely" were. It's just not clear having two sites that say different things, it just creates more confusion. Oh and by the way, you need to click their name above their picture and go back to them to get their direct url. --CircafuciX (talk) 20:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I'll start adding sources. This may take a while :-). --Azure Shrieker (talk) 20:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

That was the next thing I was going to suggest :). Also it's great because some of the lists are up for deletion and soon many others and doing that will put more weight into the article. You may comment on the list of black metal bands, industrial metal musical groups and doom metal bands if you like. --CircafuciX (talk) 21:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, I think that there must be some limit because there are alternative metal and nu metal bands who are also Christian. Where should they go now? Should list of Christian hardcore punk & metalcore bands be expanded to include them or...? --CircafuciX (talk) 21:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Alternative metal and nu metal bands should go to the List of Christian rock bands which already includes every alt band mentioned in this list. Alternative metal and nu metal may not qualify for "pure metal" but they definitely qualify for rock. Bands that have played classic metal, thrash, death, black, power, doom, or gothic metal besides alternative will be considered individually. Industrial metal falls under alternative metal but for example Circle of Dust combines plenty of thrash on its second album, so I'd say the band qualifies for this list as well. I'll have a look at those other lists.--Azure Shrieker (talk) 15:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

That looks right there, so I guess we're in the clear. :) --CircafuciX (talk) 22:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the expandable list feature

I just added the above mentioned feature to the list. You can see its wide spread usage here. I wrote about it on the AfD, and since the article made it, I thought I'd use it here. Welt^anschaunng 01:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

It does seem to make the article much harder to edit, especially for new editors. Where would you stop adding info to the expandable box? With the album list, list of band members? Kevin (talk) 03:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it will help if I post the proper format on the talk page. I really have no idea of the traffic here. It works like clockwork on the thrash list though. As for addition of info, it is about concensus. I (and a few others) have been regularly adding thrash albums to the list, moving very slowly, one band at a time. Recently I added a small description about the band to one entry. I hope to implement it to others, but finding citations is a bit work.

For this list though, I think the genre(s) and the christian metal album(s) is enough (for now). Band members; well, it will be a bit too much. Welt^anschaunng 15:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok well this is the code:

<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="padding:0;border-style:none;"> <div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="border-style:none;padding:0;"> <div class="NavHead" style="background:#EDF1F1;text-align:left;text-style:normal"> * {{flagicon|countryname}} <font size =2>

Enter Band's link here</font></div> <div class="NavContent" style="text-align:left;">

Genre:

Enter Genres here

Albums:

Enter the albums here </div></div></div>

Welt^anschaunng 15:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Expandable list

I'm liking this expandable list feature it really helps clean the page and eases the eyes. Nice implementation! But if there are problems with several editors (being ips) of placing the things in the incorrect places then this page should get protected, because theres always a storm of editing here and as I said before we could use a break of countless editing (by mostly anon ips and new users). This will allow us to test the new features without all these interruptions. Also, the page may well be deleted in a future AfD. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ ^kaiden 03:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion - weasel words

The criteria for inclusion in this list needs to be overhauled. There is nothing on how a band is (or could be) "determined to be Christian" and is "considered to be heavy metal". I don't listen to this style of music so perhaps those who do could come up with something more subjective. Kevin (talk) 03:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Expandable list feature questions

The expandable list feature raises some questions. If we hide the genres, people would have to click every band look what style they play, which could be rather annoying maybe. Should we leave the most dominating genre definition for each band, and include genres by album for the feature (See example 3)?

Example 1:

• Antestor

Genre: Unblack metal, Death/Doom, Dark metal

Albums:

• Martyrium
• The Return of the Black Death
• The Forsaken

This is based on Weltanschaunng's suggestion. It looks good. However, if the band's style simply has changed on every album. Should we do like this:

Example 2:

• Antestor

Albums:

• Martyrium (Death/Doom)
• The Return of the Black Death (Unblack metal)
• The Forsaken (Dark metal)

Or Should we do like this:

Example 3:

• Antestor (unblack metal)

Albums:

• Martyrium (Death/Doom)
• The Return of the Black Death (Unblack metal)
• The Forsaken (Dark metal)

Example 4:

• Antestor (unblack metal)

Genres:

• Dark metal ^(throughout)
• Death/Doom ^(early)
• Unblack metal ^(later)

Albums:

• Martyrium (death/doom)
• The Return of the Black Death (unblack metal)
• The Forsaken (dark metal)

Anyway, it is a great idea to use the feature, we just need to decide how to use it. I was thinking about going for the example 4. --Azure Shrieker (talk) 21:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Support Example 3 - I am in favor of Example 3, Example 4 seems kind of redundant. Axcess (talk) 22:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment - I'm somewhat for #3 as well but just having one genre next to them doesn't make sense for bands that are a couple genres and have been throughout. I won't vote for it just yet. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ ^kaiden 04:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Support Example 2 - For the simple reason that the expandable list was created so that the genres could be cleaned up and put beneath the shroud. If you put genres along with the band name outside, it defeats the very purpose of the expandable list. Welt^anschaunng 07:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment Those were only examples. If someone comes up with a better idea, tell it. Can't we find a consensus here? Heh, I kind of wish this list was deleted in AfD because it is such a pain in the back to maintain. We could just use the feature for every group, delete the genres from sight, and let the Wikipedia readers click every band. "Hmm, that's an interesting band name, let's see the details. I wonder if this one plays death metal. Oh, a metalcore band, again, just like the other 10 I just checked. Oh well, I'll just spend hours clicking these until I find a decent death metal band." Ok, maybe that's a strange demonstration, but you get the point, this list is supposed to be helpful to Wikipedia readers, be functional and tidy, I suppose :-).--Azure Shrieker (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Bolded names.

What are the bolded names for? 69.238.199.77 (talk) 04:42, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

My guess would be that those bands are the most notable out of the list. – Jerry^teps 01:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Reviewing this now, it appears that it's for bands that need extra information, although the bolded bands are the most notable ones as well. Jerry teps (talk) 04:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Impending Doom

Ahhh.... I mean they're only brutal death. What am I thinking!? FireCrystal (talk) 03:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Petra? Really?

They were never considered a metal band and they never were. They were a rock band, and occasionally had hard rock tracks, but definitely not metal. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Believer

On their myspace page, they have an interview with 105.7 radio. In the interview they stated that they never said that they labled themselves as christian metal and "laugh it off" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.231.87.47 (talk) 02:18, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Band review

I have started a review of the listed bands. I will be removing any listings if

1. The link is not to a band page (and I can't find a relevant article), and
2. If the articles don't indicate the band has any Christian connection.

I'm not planning on touching links to bands that may not be metal enough. Should be finished over the next few days. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:05, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Skillet again

• skillet is not metal. Not even close —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.115.16 (talk) 23:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Again, that's your opinion. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:52, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

It's not an opinion. How could you possobly think skillet is metal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.115.16 (talk) 00:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

You're not making friends by attacking editors and removing content without any reason. Skillet is metal when you compare it to dance music, pure Gospel music, rap, CCM, vocal pop, or much of what passes for CCM. It's definitely not hard rock or CCM. That's why they're here. So I suggest that you offer a better reason that "they're not" and go off and delete the entry again because based on your talk page, you've been warned before about this sort of behaviour. And since you're reading and commenting here I'll ask you not to remove the TFK entry. As Rapcore, they qualify to be here. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:53, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Spoken

Spoken should be here since they are post Hardcore —Preceding unsigned comment added by DCcomicslover (talk • contribs) 16:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Dizmas

Should The Dizmas be here? I think they should be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DCcomicslover (talk • contribs) 00:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

They're in the list of Christian rock bands. If they're more metal than rock, move them. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

H.I.M.

Hi, I was already familiar with the article but I went through my iTunes library and re-discovered H.I.M.'s song "The Face Of God"... I was just wondering if they have any more references to religion in any ways, and if they might be considered as Christian metal... Just wonderin'! ^^ --Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • See my edits!)} 21:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't think they are a Christian band. --E tac 22:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Or Metal for that matter.--Inhumer 06:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Its like the band lamb of God. Lambs or sheep of God in the bible are Christians and the Shepard is Jesus. The band Lamb of God is not christian at all they are a satanic band with a christian reference from the bible. Just like the song number of the beast from Iron Maiden the first i think 20 or 30 seconds comes from the book of Revelations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.45.248 (talk) 21:00, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Very funny. The only problem is that the band isn't made-up of Christians and isn't trying to convey a Christian message. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Akissforjersey

They had an article but someone delleted it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by DCcomicslover (talk • contribs) 01:43, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

It probably didn't meet WP:BAND. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Recent removal (and restoration) of bands

I think understand why they were removed but I just want to be sure. I suspect that most were removed because they didn't fit a narrow definition of what Christian metal is. I think some were removed because they were controversial. The way I have been maintaining the list is 1) to determine if the band is or is not considered part of the Christian music scene, 2) if their music touches on metal, and 3) if they don't belong on the other lists more than here. if I stepped on 3family6's toes, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to figure out why you removed a lot of bands that I think belong here. I hope I'm not showing page ownership. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

No, you haven't stepped on my toes, but I would like to explain the reasons behind my edits. A few bands I removed because they did not have an article, so I hope that there is no dispute there. The vast majority of the bands that I removed was because they are not described as any metal sub-genre on their Wikipedia pages, even though many were listed with a metal sub-genre on this page. Some bands like Day of Fire I would consider alt metal, but if a band does not have the description on their Wiki page, then they should not be on the list. I concede that a few of these bands may have had the genre descriptions on their respective articles recently changed, so if that has been the case please feel free to replace those.

With Spoken and I Am Terrified I changed and/or added to the genre description based off of the Wikipedia article.

Hope that helps clarify, --3family6 22:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3family6 (talk • contribs)

Did you specifically delete those that are Post-Hardcore? DCcomicslover (talk) 22:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)DCcomicslover

The list of entries removed is here Check the history to see individual entries. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

To DCComics: I deleted any band that did not have a metal subgenre on its Wikipedia page. Most of those bands happened to be Post-hardcore. --3family6 23:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3family6 (talk • contribs)

If there are no objections, I will remove a few bands that do not meet the criteria. As there is debate over bands that are post-hardcore, I will not touch them. Bands with redlinks or a wrong redirect I will leave for the WikiBot.--3family6 00:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3family6 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your recent changes. They're very good. Please keep it up. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome--3family6 00:21, 3 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3family6 (talk • contribs)

In the Midst Of Lions

I added them and started an article for them. If someone could help me work on it abit Id appreciate it. DCcomicslover (talk) 16:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)DCcomicslover

I might help the article a bit if I have time. I added sources for it on this list, which can be used for the article.--3family6 (talk) 23:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Think you could do it for me? I'm really no good at sourcing... DCcomicslover (talk) 21:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

List of Rock/Metal Bands

ok so I was looking through the List of Christian rock bands and Ive came across a large number of bands that I think should be here as well. DCcomicslover (talk) 01:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Move them. It's not normally acceptable to have them in both lists. I noticed the other day that there were some there that should be here and was looking for some time when I could move them myself. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:33, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

What if a band is both rock and metal, like Resurrection Band, Emery, Kutless, Thousand Foot Krutch, and host of others?--3family6 (talk) 02:42, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

This is a common question with lists. For instance, should a band be listed under both the Ska and Punk pages? You usually have to list them in the one that they are most like and then trust that people will look through the see more links below the main article. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

But what if they are ska-punk, which is both styles? And how does one know which style they are most like? Bands often play multiple styles. For instance, Rez Band has played blues-style hard rock, heavy metal, and new wave at different points in their career, and so can be listed under all three genres. I guess my point is that this gets into incredibly subjective territory, and unless a controversy can be found, there is no reason not to include bands on multiple lists. But you have said above that it is not normally acceptable practice to include on multiple lists, so is it possible for you to direct me to where this was decided?--3family6 (talk) 03:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay I went through the list and picked a number of bands to add. None will be sourced so if someone could please... DCcomicslover (talk) 18:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover All right I added a bunch of bands. If they don't line up with metal than feel free to delete them but at least keep the post-Hardcore ones. If they mentioned metal or posthardcore in their article I added them. A few Hard rocks may have worked their way in as well as well so feel free to check my work. DCcomicslover (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

I am sourcing the bands now. For now, post-hardcore bands stay with a "citation needed" tag, but in order to keep them you will have to show how post-hardcore is a metal genre.--3family6 (talk) 23:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Im gonna do another run through of the christian rock list but I always thought that Post harcore was was a branch of metal. It's a border between rock and metal. Or so i thought. Alot of PH bands are heavier than some metal bands. DCcomicslover (talk) 23:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

It doesn't matter anyway in this case, as all the bands sourced as post-hardcore also have played metal (though the Secret & Whisper source is dubious). I myself don't know much about post-hardcore, but from what I have read it is an offshoot of hardcore, and has no direct connection with metal.--3family6 (talk) 23:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

removal of Kekal

Sorry about the removal of King James, that was accidental. As to Kekal, I should probably have discussed it on here. My edit was supposed to have an explanation, but I accidentally sent the edit through before I could finish (which is probably why I did not catch that King James was included). My rational for Kekal is that there is debate as to whether they are Christian, and the only qualification that they have for Christian metal is that the members have expressed Christian beliefs, although their earliest material has a Christian message. They probably meet the criteria of this list, I don't really know why I took them off the list (probably too much time on Wikipedia).--3family6 (talk) 16:36, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

The leaders have expressed faith. They also have many Christian themes. During their metal phase, they released an album that's a favourite of one of my favourite podcasts: Metal Blessing Radio. They're listed on his band list. The tracks he plays are quite Christian. Will have to check the band's article. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:15, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for double-checking for me, though as I said before, I'm not sure why I felt the need to remove them. If you think they should be removed, fine, but I do not think they warrant removal.--3family6 (talk) 21:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Flagicons

Why are there so many Flagicons all of the sudden? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DCcomicslover (talk • contribs) 17:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

All of a sudden? As long as I have been aware of the existence of this list, which is probably like 2 years, I have always seen it with flagicons. Maybe I don't understand your question?--3family6 (talk) 19:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Every band used to only have one flagicon. Now we have a band with 3! DCcomicslover (talk) 18:01, 6 December 2010 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Oh, okay, I thought that might have been what you meant. I have been assuming that the flagicons represent the countries band members are and have been citizens of. In the case of Altera Enigma, the members hail from two countries, and the member from Indonesia moved to Canada several years ago, hence the third flag.

If the flags only represent the origins of the band, and I have been mistaken with my interpretation, sorry for the confusion, and I will remove some of the flags (though Altera Enigma still gets two!)

--3family6 (talk) 23:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Flagicons in list articles contravene WP:FLAG anyway, as I have been pointing out with little success of anyone listening for some years now. Nonetheless, the consensus has always been for them to represent the bands' nationalities (hence we always use the UK flag for British bands etc). Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:18, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I was kind of wondering about the flags here myself, but I wasn't that sure, and I felt a removal would get reverted anyway. So flags represent origin and is a member has moved the current nation? Or just the origin? This probably doesn't even matter, as they shouldn't be here anyway. Also, thanks for stepping in here with the genre thing, this page is always a mess. There is a real lack of sourcing here, and as I'm getting better with identifying reliable sources, I'll probably do a lot of it myself. I'm planning to do some more work on here, but I am shorthanded on time.

With all that out of the way, I will now step down off my soap box.--3family6 (talk) 01:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Update: I have been combing MOS:FLAG, and I cannot find anything that frowns upon use of flagicons in lists. The only thing I found regarding their use in lists is that they can be removed if it is determined that they cause problem with clarity. I have noticed that there is a stipulation that flagicons be used along with the name of a nation, not as a replacement.--3family6 (talk) 14:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, the issue as I see it is that MOS:FLAG states that they shouldn't be used decoratively, or to place undue weight on the band's nationality, and also that the name of the country must be listed as well whenever they are used. This creates a redundancy, unless you are claiming that the use of flagicons has a purpose other than decoration? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 20:01, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

See WP:ICONDECORATION for more details. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 20:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying. I have no problem removing them, I might do so soon.--3family6 (talk) 22:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing

As can be seen on the page history for the article, I am attempting source all of the bands listed here. Some unsourced bands may be removed.--3family6 (talk) 23:07, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest simply marking them with a citation needed reference before removing them. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:45, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. So far, I have only removed one band, the others I put citation needed notices on.--3family6 (talk) 23:49, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

As can be seen, the genre descriptions have been removed by a user, as they were unsourced. Once I have finished sourcing all of these bands, I plan to re-introduce subgenres with sources as a drop-down feature.--3family6 (talk) 16:55, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Finished sourcing. I need to go back through and see if any need minor corrections. Next phase is bringing back the subgenres. I plan to use the expandable list feature for them unless there is not enough information.--3family6 (talk) 23:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Expandable list creation is underway, it will probably take a while --3family6 (talk) 16:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

This is AWESOME man! Keep up the good work!! DCcomicslover (talk) 02:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Thanks. This is the result of just coming out of my first semester and having loads of free time. I'll probably have to slow down in a few days.--3family6 (talk) 03:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I am tweaking the expandable list feature. It will not work for every single band as the page will probably crash. I don't know what I was thinking, but I will fix everything to work better.--3family6 (talk) 13:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Who deleted all the genres to begin with? DCcomicslover (talk) 14:51, 22 December 2010 (UTC)DCcomicslover

I did, as not a single one was sourced, and they are an edit-war minefield; save it for the individual band's articles. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh dear, I have just noticed that someone has started addeing back the "subgenres". This is an absurd notion; you'll end up with a page with so many citations that it will take an aeon to load, and will be a magnet for genre warriors. That level of detail/disagreement between sources is much, much better suited to the individual band pages. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:44, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I am still figuring out the logistics of all of this. I strongly feel that style descriptions should be included, as unlike most other genres, Christian metal is not based on sound, but rather on lyrical content, and because this allows for a sound as diverse as metal itself, I think that a description of subgenres called for. However, as you pointed out, there are many problems with this. With the number of citations that this article has ended up with just for bands to qualify on the list, I have been considering a split, so that will probably solve the problem of page size. As to genre warriors, 1) the info is sourced, and I put up a warning on the edit page that any change that is not sourced will be reverted, and 2) I have tried to keep the styles very general, and I may make them even more generalized when I work more on this page. Thank you for your concern, and I am trying to work out a solution here that will solve these problems yet also inform the reader of a band's basic style.--3family6 (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I still fail to see an argument for their inclusion; that information will be present, in detail, and fully sourced/argued on their talk pages... this is purely and simply a suplication of information. No-one has yet addressed the WP:FLAG infraction either. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:44, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

This page is becoming too time consuming for me anyway. For now I will remove the contentious information until the issue is resolved, and it would take me forever to finish everything anyway and would leave the page half-finished for who knows how long. I also put up a proposal to split the page, as the list is a bit too long. Should I remove the flags as well until a resolution is reached?--3family6 (talk) 21:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I propose that we leave the flagicons. But what do you mean by splitting the page? By genres? DCcomicslover (talk) 15:58, 23 December 2010 (UTC)DCcomicslover

I meant split the page alphabetically, with the first thirteen on one page and the second thirteen on a second page. See List of black metal bands. But your suggestion is something I had in the back of my mind, maybe splitting it by genre might work. I probably put a test page up on my profile and work on it there, maybe get some feedback on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3family6 (talk • contribs) 16:17, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

New idea on sourcing

The article is taking a long time to load, at least it is for me. I was thinking that maybe we should move the refs to a sub page like List of Christian metal bands/references and just leave the band names on the article itself. Comments? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:28, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I have had loading problems too. I also considered putting the references in a separate page, I saw a list once that did that, but as I can't remember how to find it I wasn't going to suggest it. Your proposal is fine by me.--3family6 (talk) 23:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Allies? not likely

Source indicates that they're CCM/AOR. Quote is "a rock band [with] the ability to wear a variety of stylistic hats", one of which is "raunchy heavy metalers" and Man with a Mission definitely has some hard-rocking tracks, but not a single track is "raunchy" or even approaching what was taken as heavy metal in 1992. If the album had come out in 1972, it could have been considered metal. It goes on to mention "doowop revivalists", because they have a Billy Joel-inspired track on the album as well. And even if we accept it as a source for half, and I'm being generous her, of the tracks in the one album, you have five other albums' worth of material to account for. Their rockiest song was actually the title track of the previous album Long Way from Paradise. They were a west-coast AOR band not metal and Man with a Mission had some electric blues songs (direct musical rips from traditional blues songs with "Christianized" lyrics).

So here's a situation where the source indicates metal, but their overall body of work is not metal. I don't think that they should be listed, but we have a source that seems to support addition. I can confirm with the Encyclopedia of CCM tonight, but I can't imagine a reason to keep them in the list. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I have never heard of the band before, so I cannot vouch from personal experience. But in the source it says that they have played heavy metal, which is a form of rock, and whether the album is "raunchy" or not is not up to us as editors. Tony Cummings is a professional writer and has followed the CCM scene for years. Even so, a band does not have to be included even if a reliable source can be provided, but we need a really good reason not to include them, beyond metal not being their predominant style (which, judging from sources, varied anyway). I will not put them back up for now, but a consensus needs to be developed or else they go back.--3family6 (talk) 23:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

After some thinking, I have thought of a potential compromise: Maybe put Allies back in the list, but place a dubious tag next to the sources?--3family6 (talk) 02:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Images in the list?

Might make the list difficult to read, especially on narrow monitors or hand-held devices. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I admit that thought had not occurred to me. If you think they are a problem, feel free to remove them.--3family6 (talk) 16:03, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I say we keep Underoaths image and instead move it up top and just have that one. DCcomicslover (talk) 21:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover:

I removed the images for now, the log can be found here.--3family6 (talk) 16:15, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Change page description?

Hi, I have watched this page for a while, and I personally feel that the page description needs to be fixed. Right now, the description reads: "This list features bands who have been determined to be Christian and play heavy metal music or one of its subgenres. This list omits some bands of disputed status as a "Christian band.""

Now this is the problem: What does the second sentence mean by "some bands of disputed status"? Who determines which bands are the "some" that are omitted? There are several bands on here that according to the description should not be here. Kekal and Trouble are two that I can think of offhand, and I know that there are others. Also, a helpful addition to the description would be an admonition that only bands with their own Wikipedia article should be included, as I constantly see bands listed on here that do not have an article.

So, my suggestion is that either

1) all disputed bands be removed, and the description read: "This is a list of Christian metal bands. This list omits any band with disputed status as a Christian metal band."

Or 2) the description should be changed, maybe to something like this: "This list features bands who have been determined to be Christian and play heavy metal music or one of its subgenres, as well as bands who have been associated with the Christian metal movement."

Either way, the description needs to be cleaned up so it is not as nebulous. --3family6 14:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3family6 (talk • contribs)

What is the definition of "who have been determined to be Christian"? Who is making that determination? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I would say any band that is considered Christian by multiple third-party sources, and this status is not overly controversial (i.e. Stryper is not controversial, while Trouble is.)--3family6 15:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

So does each band need multiple references? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:18, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Ideally, yes, though I wouldn't make a big fight over it. But ultimately, that is the only way to determine if they are Christian. The reason for my initial topic post here was to suggest that the page description be modified in some way to better specify what is included/excluded. The addition of bands seems somewhat arbitrary right now, so I felt that clarification might be in order. --3family6 22:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Editorial Comment My above statement about multiple refs not being needed was a one-time statement, before most of the bands were sourced. Bands do need to be sourced for inclusion on the list.--3family6 (talk) 18:37, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed split

I am developing a list that splits the article by genre. See here to check and see if I should expand, fix, or create more categories. Thank you, --3family6 (talk) 01:55, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

The list is pretty much finished, it will probably take a few weeks to implement it, I will list bands on my talk and when finished use the lists to create the separate pages.--3family6 (talk) 03:12, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Just looked at it now and I don't think this is the way to go. It would be better to list the sub-genres the band is associated with directly in the list. Breaking it down into sections like this seems arbitrary. Some bands have spanned several genres so how do you select which section, or do they get added to multiple?

Not sure why we were splitting. What was the rationale again? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I think its that the list is getting a bit long. DCcomicslover (talk) 03:47, 30 December 2010 (UTC)DCcomicslover

As DCcomics said, the reasoning for the split was because the list is a bit too long, especially with all of the references. I keep getting a message at the top that says the list is 81 kilobytes, which is definitely long enough to split. So maybe just split alphabetically, and put subgenres in the way they were before?--3family6 (talk) 13:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I've seen longer. I've also never seen a list with refs. Perhaps making a separate article just for the refs. No. That's not workable. The 1000th longest article on Wikipedia is 137,239 bytes Special:LongPages. I don't think that 83000 bytes is all that long. My main concern is that as the genres evolve, who will maintain the list? Who decides when a genre is split, and how to list artists that have spanned multiple genres? Would it be unreasonable to move the references to the articles for the bands? Each article could have a genre section or something similar. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I have seen many lists with refs, see List of Viking metal bands, List of melodic death metal bands, List of highways in Essex County, New York, and List of tallest structures in Tokyo (okay, I admit that the last two I looked up to prove my point). Putting inline citations into lists of articles also follows guidelines set by WP:FL?, and also WP:LSC because this list sees a lot of dispute.

Now, if the article remains un-split, I think including subgenres will not work, because as Blackmetalbaz pointed out in the previous section, the page will have so many references that some computers could have trouble loading. Even if the page is left as it is right now with no subgenres, I think it should be split per WP:SPLIT and possibly WP:LENGTH. The message I mentioned above about the 81 kilobytes also suggests a split.

The big question seems to whether to include subgenres. As far as I can tell, Blackmetalbaz opposes inclusion as, in addition to page size considerations, inclusion of subgenres can bring in genre warriors. You have brought up the problem of maintenance as well. DCcomicslover seems to be in favor of including subgenres. I favor inclusion as well, but only if a good solution can be worked out to the above problems. So the question is, should subgenres be included? If so, should they immediately follow the band name, as was done in the past on this list, or should they be listed in subdivisions such as those on my user page, albeit in a simpler/more broad format? To avoid genre wars, perhaps subgenres should be fairly basic, i.e. metalcore, progressive metal, black metal. Multiple subgenres are not a problem if listed in subdivisions, as a band would just have multiple listings.

Sorry for the length of this post, hopefully it will solve problems and not create more.--3family6 (talk) 00:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Well said. OK. My primary role here is a guardian. I'm not here primarily to add refs or monitor additions, I'm just here to ensure that the page isn't vandalized. I will attempt to perform the same role with whatever sub-pages are created. With that said, I'm less familiar with sub-genres of Christian metal, especially extreme metal sub-genres, but will attempt to do what I can. I;m not a fan of Gospel music, but perform that task on the list of gospel musicians. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure how familiar I am with Christian metal subgenres as well, I don't really follow the scene and most of what I do know is from what I have read. I might just list bands under really major subgenres like alternative metal, death metal, and traditional metal, etc., to avoid genre wars. Unless you or someone else thinks the division on my user page is feasible. I'll probably take a break dealing with this page for a few days to let things settle.--3family6 (talk) 01:28, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Here is my theory. I'll run it by you 2 first because I think we 3 oare the only ones on this page often enough. What if we only added the main subgenre of each band? I'm pretty good at subgenres and could do it over time. DCcomicslover (talk) 17:02, 31 December 2010 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Sounds good, but again, who decides what the main sub-genre is? In all honesty, that sort of debate would affect fewer than 10% of the bands. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Good point. Any other ideas? DCcomicslover (talk) 19:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

I think that listing them by the main subgenre(s) could work if done right. The "main" subgenre of a band would be whichever styles get the most mentions. The problem with this is that it gets into problems with WP:OR. The best way that this would work would be to stick to major styles, like metalcore, traditional metal, prog metal, etc. My personal opinion is that this idea is not the best, and gets into very subjective territory.--3family6 (talk) 14:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree with above whole-heartedly; it sounds like edit-war magnet waiting to happen. There's absolutely no need to list any subgenres, let alone get into OR/NPOV disputes about what the main one is. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

While I agree that there is no need to list subgenres, I think that it is very helpful to list subgenres. I can vouch from personal experience from before I was an active editor that I found the inclusion of subgenres was very helpful for researching bands, as I could see what general style a band falls under. I believe that additional information for the reader was part of the rationale given in previous discussions on this page over whether to include subgenres [6], [7]. And according to Wikipedia policy, one of the advantages of lists is that they can be annotated to give the reader additional information (WP:AOAL, #5). But I wholeheartedly agree that just listing bands "main" styles is a bad idea. If subgenres are given, they should be as specific as the sources.

The other way to give subgenres is to list by subgenres, as suggested on my user page. This could also allow for NPOV generalization of styles as well, just like the List of death metal bands, List of doom metal bands, etc.

Though I feel that subgenres should be included, if a consensus is developed that they shouldn't be included, I will go along with that and enforce that consensus.--3family6 (talk) 15:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S.: I just found this. Perhaps rework the list into this type of format? I believe that Wikipedia policy prefers that lists avoid table format, but I just thought I would add this idea to the discussion.--3family6 (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Tables are evil! Its unnecessary. If it can be described in prose, it's better. A lot less render time for the browser. However, we're supposed to concern ourselves with content and not the technology behind it. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

So far, a consensus doesn't seem to have developed. Should I just split the page alphabetically and ignore the genre debate for now?--3family6 (talk) 22:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I just found the List of thrash metal bands, and while it could use sourcing, I think the general layout idea might work well for this list. It will probably help with listing genres, and will take care of the flag infraction that Blackmetalbaz mentioned (though I still can't find what he is talking about).--3family6 (talk) 14:00, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

What appeals to you about the list? I don't like how some bands have prose written about them while others are just bullet-points. The division by country is also a bit distracting. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:32, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

What appeals to me is the use of annotations and detailed prose. The division by country is distracting though.--3family6 (talk) 22:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The new editor on the punk list might have an interesting point. If we move the hardcore bands to the punk list that would free-up room on this list. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

That would work, but most of the hardcore bands that are on this list are also metal, so it would only reduce this list by a little bit.--3family6 (talk) 23:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Define hardcore bands. that could mean anything. Metalcore? or what? DCcomicslover (talk) 16:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Hardcore meaning hardcore punk.--3family6 (talk) 18:31, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit: Unless the above question was not addressed to me.--3family6 (talk) 19:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

It Was. I don't even think we have any of those on this list that aren't metal sourced. DCcomicslover (talk) 17:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Point taken. The only pure hardcore bands on this list are obviously unsourced.--3family6 (talk) 17:39, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

List of metalcore bands

This is an idea I have been brooding over for a while. With this list, and also pretty with the List of Christian punk bands, a great deal of the bands are metalcore. To help with size issues and maybe also to avoid annoying genre disputes, perhaps a separate List of Christian metalcore bands could be created?--3family6 (talk) 03:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

How many bands would that take out of the metal list and out of the punk list? It might be bigger than the ska list, but ska was, from my understanding, a more popular genre. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Though ska was maybe more popular in the mainstream, there are a lot more metalcore bands, as the metalcore scene has become saturated. A list of metalcore bands would take at lot of bands out of the metal list. It might not help as much on the punk list as most metalcore bands are also sourced as hardcore/post-hardcore and/or screamo, but it might help a little. With ska list, I would re-word it to included ska-punk, and that would keep some bands off this list. If another list was created for emo and screamo bands, that could shrink the list even more (though with many screamo bands there is still that annoying post-hardcore which ruins things).--3family6 (talk) 13:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Needs a big cleanup.

A lot of bands on here (Dizmas, Underoath, Dead Poetic, etc.) have absolutely nothing to do with metal, and would only be labeled as such by someone who thinks that all hard music is metal. I'm currently busy editing the Christian punk list, so I thought I would throw it out there in case anyone else has the time. --Invisiboy42293 (talk) 23:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Of the bands you listed, only Dead Poetic is unsourced. I will remove Dead Poetic, but the others are sourced and stay.--3family6 (talk) 00:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

What sort of clean-up is needed? Now do you understand why we need WP:RS for lists? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:38, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I know, I know. No need to say I told you so. DCcomicslover (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Dcomicslover

Spitfire

I might have found an interview with them that can count as a source for them being included. It's on lambgoat. com DCcomicslover (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

It might, though a third-party source would really help as well. If you can post it here, it would help. Even if they no longer are a Christian group, if they were at some point it would still count, just like King's X.--3family6 (talk) 21:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

As long as it's a WP:RS too, we're good. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

http://www.lambgoat.com/features/interviews/spitfire.aspx I think this is it. 00:08, 23 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover — Preceding unsigned comment added by DCcomicslover (talk • contribs)

That looks good, but a secondary source should be found as well because of the controversy over the Cult Fiction album cover.--3family6 (talk) 23:23, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll work on it but I'm having a hard time finding band interviews. I HATE reclusive bands DCcomicslover (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)DCcomiclover Hmmm.... Would their Solid State Records page work? DCcomicslover (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

All that does is prove that they are on Solid State records, which has mostly Christian bands. But unfortunately, it won't work because 1) No mention of Christianity, and 2) not a third-party source. Not trying to shoot you down or anything, its just that we need better sources.--3family6 (talk) 23:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

No it's cool. I guess I'll keep looking. If I can come up with one surely I can come up with 2.... What about their myspace profile? Tey're listed as gospel there. DCcomicslover (talk) 20:20, 14 February 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Myspace is the same problem as the others above, you need one that is not attributed to the band itself or its label. Hope you find something, you sure are determined.--3family6 (talk) 21:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Myspace is acceptable as a reliable primary source about the subject, but not about others. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:52, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

See WP:PRIMARY --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

You are completely correct, but in this case I don't think they are enough. "Gospel" really doesn't say anything anyway, as Elvis Presley performed Gospel. Usually, I think the lambgoat.com interview would be enough, as in it the band states Christian beliefs. But the only secondary source that discusses the band's faith that I have found so far is a Cross Rhythms review which says that there is a lot of controversy about whether the band is Christian and that "any beliefs the band may or may not have are well hidden." Now, while there was a member of Christian band Norma Jean in the band at one point (incidentally, he left right before the controversial album), this doesn't necessarily confirm that the band is Christian (a very relevant example of this is Rocky Gray drumming for Evanescence). So, basically, while primary sources might usually be enough to source a band as Christian, the controversy around the band presents a special case.--3family6 (talk) 23:12, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

http://www.smother.net/interviews/spitfire.php try this.... DCcomicslover (talk) 20:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover And I also found this as well. Not as deep as I dug for the last one. http://www.technicianonline.com/features/a-christian-band-with-a-metalcore-1.1111379 DCcomicslover (talk) 20:52, 15 February 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Technicianonline appears to be student paper, but it looks reliable enough to me. I would say go ahead, though you might want to wait for someone else to weigh in.--3family6 (talk) 21:00, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

And The first one? DCcomicslover (talk) 21:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

The first one is an interview, which is a primary source, which works as long as there is reliable secondary sourcing as well, which you appear to have found.--3family6 (talk) 21:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

YESSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!! Probably should wait for Walter though. He's the only one that really spends any time here. DCcomicslover (talk) 21:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Who am I to argue with a source? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

To Speak of Wolves

Currently, To Speak of Wolves should not be on the list as there are no sources that state them as metal. Now, I have a heard a few of their songs, and I am positive they are metalcore, but my opinion does not count. The main problem is that they are just too small a group, perhaps when they get more exposure we will get a source.--3family6 (talk) 20:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ref found.--3family6 (talk) 21:00, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Callisto

Callisto has been tagged for a bit, I'm just creating a section where they can be discussed. Issue in question: Allmusic simply mentions "religious imagery," it doesn't claim them to be Christian. I have yet to find a source for the band being Christian.--3family6 (talk) 20:37, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=2721 try this. Not sure how reliable it is But it was short notice research DCcomicslover (talk) 16:24, 18 February 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

User generated and unreliable, but would probably be enough to keep them on the list while being discussed. Fortunately, I found this interview a few moments ago, in which they claim Christianity:http://scratchthesurface-webzine.blogspot.com/2009/06/callisto-interview-with-markus.html --3family6 (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Consensus on bands

Instructions

I think it is about time we established a consensus on bands that are commonly added and removed from the page. To establish a consensus of a band, add the band below as a subheading of the Bands section, then cast your vote with a bold Include or Exclude, followed by your reasoning and your signature. If you wish to change your vote later on perhaps because people Have presented a good case for including the band, Strike out your previous vote Like this, and put a new vote, reason and signature beneath your old vote.

Bands

Thousand Foot Krutch

• Exclude - TFK is Christian, however they qualify as Rapcore, and does not really use any elements of metal. Axcess (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
• Exclude Yup, more rock. --Azure Shrieker (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
• You bring up good points but as a Rapcore band, they are still techinally metal. Include. GreenRunner0 02:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
• Include - Rapcore is a cross-over genre of metal and rap. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
• Exclude there is NO way that TFK is metal. And I say that as a fan of both metal and TFK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.115.16 (talk) 23:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
• Include - Rapcore. 66.177.182.13 (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Offering up "Move", "Bounce", and "Rawkfist" as examples. From the lyrics of the latter: "It's time to take it up a notch, and keep it locked, for all the headbangers in the parking lot. Here we come, if you're ready or not" (emph. added.) 66.177.182.13 (talk) 00:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

• Strong Exclude - Rapcore is a mix between rap and hardcore punk, and in any case the band is now just a regular rock band. I see no connection between them and metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Invisiboy42293 (talk • contribs) 04:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Rapcore is a mix between rap and hardcore. Hardcore is a mix of metal and hardcore punk. Hardcore is dealt with in this list. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:13, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Hardcore punk is just what it says, the style and attitude of punk taken to the extreme. Otherwise, how could Metalcore be considered a fusion genre? Hardcore should not be dealt with on this list, except for bands that have been mislabeled. --Invisiboy42293 (talk) 04:23, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

As Invisiboy42283 states, hardcore is not a mix of metal and punk, though often hardcore bands mix with metal. But, there are sources in the list that describe TFK as nu-metal, so they can stay.--3family6 (talk) 13:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

They do have several genres of metal listed on their page. Still, they do have a profile on absolutepunk.net (source), so I'll be adding them on the punk list as well.--Invisiboy42293 (talk) 23:04, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Fine by me.--3family6 (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Not fine. One place or the other. Not both. Also, is http://www.absolutepunk.net a WP:RS? It looks like a fan site. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:34, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

They are sourced as both, which means they go on both lists, the only way that they might only be on one list is if there is a specific source that identifies a particular style as the majorly predominant one. AbsolutePunk appears to be published by a third-party source and have editorial oversight, so unless I am incorrect about that they are reliable. However, the AbsolutePunk profile of the band simply says "alternative," which is not good enough. However, several Jesus Freak Hideout reviews, including the one sourced on this page, identify them with several punk and metal styles.--3family6 (talk) 00:46, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Will accept AbsolutePunk as a WP:RS. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Update on AbsolutePunk, not always reliable, see here--3family6 (talk) 00:29, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

P.O.D.

• Include - P.O.D. Makes blatant references to God and Jesus in their older CDs in particular, and are pretty much a text book definition of Nu Metal. Axcess (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
• Include Whether nu metal is "true metal" or not, these guys were in a huge position in bringing Christian metal movement back to the world map. That alone qualifies them.--Azure Shrieker (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
• Exclude nu metal is like the average high school teenager: its trying to be something its not. nu metal only sounds hard but does not qualify as metal. if bands "metal status" were determined by how hard they sound, then gothic metal and bands that play the genre would not qualify. Exmpl: virgin black isnt hard at all yet it still qualifies as metal because of how its played. evry genre of metal has a patern it follows. people are aparently forgeting that because i keep seeing cases where metalcore and death metal are being mixed up. nu metal does not follow an actual style of metal. its just called metal because people thought it would make it cooler.
  • Hard or not, Nu Metal is still metal. IncludeGreenRunner0 02:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
• Include - Nu metal all the way. It's harder than you can rock. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
• Include - Nu metal. 66.177.182.13 (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Skillet

• Include - Skillet's Alien Youth album seems to be a pretty good example of Industrial Metal, and Collide seems like a good example of Alternative Metal. Axcess (talk) 20:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
• Exclude They have some heavier riffs here and there, but they are really more industrial rock or modern rock in my opinion. --Azure Shrieker (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
• Include - Skillet are not modern rock. They are a symphonic, Industrial band, but for the majority of non-listeners, they're metal. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
• exclude. skillet is not metal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.115.16 (talk) 23:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
• Include - I offer up "Kill Me, Heal Me", "Rebirthing", "Whispers in the Dark", and "Live Free or Let Me Die" as examples. 66.177.182.13 (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
• Exclude - Maybe had metal influences in the past, but as of their newest album, they are specifically hard rock and not any kind of metal.--Invisiboy42293 (talk) 04:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

• Sourced as melodic metal. Also, though AllMusic tags are not really good by Wikipedia technicalities, a few Skillet albums are tagged as alt-metal.--3family6 (talk) 22:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Day of Fire

• Include - Adding here because I considered adding to the list but was looking for consensus. Definitely "hard rock", possibly along the same lines as Skillet. I'm not sure why their wiki page consistently gets reverted away from "Christian Rock". 66.177.182.13 (talk) 19:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

• Exclude - Post-grunge, not any kind of metal.--Invisiboy42293 (talk) 04:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

• Sourced as alt-metal.--3family6 (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

King's X

It should be known that they are not a Christian band. There have had countless interviews with the Band and always comes up "are you guys Christian?" Always answer is no. They have a lot of "inspirational" Lyrics but let's face it one of the members is gay and that would suggest not Christian. It's a great band and I could see why they may be considered Christian with the first three albums you can hear biblical themes if you know the Bible. I thin (not sure of this) one of the members is a Believer or is an apostate. 74.70.28.219 (talk) 21:08, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

• Include Doug Pinnick and Ty Tabor are definitely Christians. Can't speak for the rest of the band. I suspect that the band was addressing whether they wanted to be considered as part of the larger Christian music industry and they obviously don't, but that's not the only definition of what a Christian band is. Faith Hope Love made the #7 in HM magazine's list of top 100 Christian rock albums and so the compilers of that list think they're a Christian band. There are many others who believe that a Christian band is defined by its members not by the industry. So with that said, who without a WP:V source one way or the other, there's no reason to remove them from the list. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Doug Pinnick has announced he is a homosexual, and he and another of the band's three members have renounced Christianity. However, they were considered a Christian band before that time, so I think they should be included, though an attempt at a consensus for their removal could be started if someone objected.--3family6 (talk) 00:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Additional Comments

I feel this is necessary to give us just cause for removing bands from the list, and avoid edit wars. if anyone has any objections to me putting this up, feel free. Axcess (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

This is definitely necessary. The List of Christian rock bands got deleted in AfD so people are now adding every even relatively "heavy" band here. I could add a ton of hardcore and metalcore groups here that constantly get added and removed.--Azure Shrieker (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)