Talk:Born of Osiris

The Genre of the Band

It isn't just deathcore. It is a prog-metal influenced deathcore band, and someone should put the band's genre to "Progressive metal, deathcore..." And maybe technical death metal too...

Genre

Metalcore? What? This is progressive death\deathcore.

128.95.102.194 (talk) 17:33, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. The Flying Spaghetti Monster! 16:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Notability

I removed the notability tag. They have an album that reached 79 on the Billboard 200, which if I'm not mistaken is a national music chart, and there a clear and reliable reference for this. Hence they are notable. The Flying Spaghetti Monster! 23:13, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

The New Reign

It's definetly an LP, not an EP. It's listed as such in just about every piece of source material I could find.Ngk44 (talk) 02:18, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

• At under 22 minutes, it's an EP. If you have all this source material that states otherwise, I suggest citing those pages in the article because I see the exact opposite. NJZombie (talk) 03:19, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, don't add "djent" to the list of genres. Born of Osiris may indeed be Meshuggah influenced, but they sound nothing like the leading 'djent' band (such as Periphery and TesseracT) and aren't part of the same scene/movement.Ngk44 (talk) 02:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Prog deathcore

The band is Progressive deathcore, leave it as that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.65.119.68 (talk) 18:01, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

You don't have consensus and you don't get to dictate for others to "leave it as that." As I stated previously, I personally don't care what people want to call them. Genres can be interpreted in too many different ways. However, you're trying to link a genre with no article by linking to two different articles and making it appear as one genre. If you're going to insist on progressive deathcore as the category, why not first get consensus to add it as a section in the progressive metal category and THEN attempt to add the genre here once that's done? Then, you have no issues other than the people who are going to fight you over whether the genre applies or not. NJZombie (talk) 18:14, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Simply just call this god damn band "Deathcore". The vocals are the most important instrument in Death Metal and the vocals in this band are "screamed", as opposed to "growls", which is in Death Metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CynicalDouche (talk • contribs) 22:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

"vocals are the most important instrument in death metal" hahahahahahahahaha. Surely that is a joke!! Lol.

Jason Richardson Leaving

I was the first to post the whole story about Jason being kicked out of Born of Osiris. I'm upset that I received a block warning accusing me of 'changing another editors work'. I didn't change anyone's work because before me, no one else posted anything about it. I think my edits should be allowed to stay on the page.

The warning has nothing to do with changing the work of somebody else or who posted information first. It's because your additions are inappropriate and you keep reverting them back when told that they were inappropriate. Just cutting and pasting entire blocks of quotes is not a suitable entry method. Stating that he left and providing the source from where the information came from, as it is written now, does the job perfectly. NJZombie (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

My 'warning' clearly stated that I was changing another editors work. I didn't change ANYONE'S work because no one else posted anything. My edits were truthful and informative. To call my edits 'inappropriate' is just like calling the Nazi's superiority complex justifiable. There was nothing inappropriate about my work. I told each side of the story in complete neutrality. I didn't take sides nor did I exaggerate either side. I posted each comment WORD FOR WORD. Editing like yours makes me abandon any hope of wikipedia ever becoming a scholarly, reliable, truthful source. If you think deleting truthful, informative edits to replace them with some 'simple is better' bullshit is 'perfect', then I highly recommend you take a long glance at the dictionary and reevaluate your definition of 'editing'. Inappropriate? I've never heard such total horse shit in my life.

Exactly. You posted word for word. That's the problem. That's not how it's done. I don't make the rules. As far as the warning goes, it's a template. I explained what the 3RR rule means. You can choose to accept it or not. The outcome will remain the same. NJZombie (talk) 18:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I cited my sources, I told the truth, and I didn't exaggerate. If Wikipedia prefers reworded bullshit instead of the truth straight from the source then I don't want any part of this site and ALL. You can keep your unprofessional articles. You do what you have to do to enforce these bogus rules. Peace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.30.222.96 (talk) 18:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

That's what Wikipedia demands.... actually writing the article, not copying and pasting what someone else wrote. NJZombie (talk) 18:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I only copied and pasted direct quotes from the members themselves. What the hell do you want me to do, interview them myself? Hell if that's what wikipedia's articles are based on then no wonder no one trusts you guys. It's hilariously pathetic. Whatever though. Later... much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.30.222.96 (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Adding quotes is fine, but not when they form the entire body of the information. Newspaper articles report information daily. They create articles based on things people say and do without resorting to copying and pasting entire paragraphs and sticking quotation marks around them. Wikipedia articles hold the same standard. Additionally, information ideally should be sourced from an independent source, not directly from the subjects themselves. For a discussion about what you can legally copy in large amounts, see the section about copying other material. NJZombie (talk) 18:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Genre

Born of Osiris is an extreme metal band that performs deathcore and progressive metal. Calling them metalcore isn't specific enough (deathcore is a style of metal influenced by metalcore). It should be left at that. TomUSA 20:49, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Deathcore and progressive metal is more appropriate than just metalcore. However, with the notable fusion genre progressive metalcore (also known as technical metalcore finally having an established Wikipedia presence, I recommend adding "technical metalcore." It's much more specific than metalcore and references a fusion with progressive metal. Plenty of sites have referred to the technical nature of Born of Osiris' music. The media company Bandwagon (www.bandwagon.asia/articles/news) among many many others have referred to Born of Osiris as "technical metalcore." I would prefer not to clutter the infobox with references, but we can discuss further if you'd like. Happy editing. -Chrisbkoolio (talk) 19:57, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Origin

Why is the band's origin constantly being changed to Chicago? They are from Palatine. I know people personally who were friends with the band and even worked with them. They are from Palatine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.51.52.98 (talk) 21:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Born of Osiris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131208095752/http://www.daviddarocha.com/ to http://www.daviddarocha.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:42, 6 November 2016 (UTC)