Talk:Death (metal band)

Year Death was dissolved?

What year was Death dissolved? This section [1] has it at about 2001,though the last time the band actually released new material was in 1998, according to [2]. Should live albums count as the band being active or should 1999 be the ending date for the final line-up in the musicians section? ThanksDavid O. Johnson (talk) 22:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I think 2001 is the proper date and used almost universally as the end of the band. Despite Chuck turning his attention to the Control Denied project by 1999, his cancer diagnosis changed things, and the next two years were dominated not by his music career but fighting the losing battle against his disease. There is no way to know if Chuck would have recorded another Death album if he had lived, and since he continued to surround himself with the same bunch of musicians in both projects, it is fair to say that Death had not been formally dissolved at the time Chuck failed to recover from his last treatments before he died. Best, A Sniper (talk) 07:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Chuck did mention in an interview that he had riffs for another Death album. "A: Provided Control Denied does as well, and you still feel Death is holding you back will you ever lay Death to rest? No pun intended... A: (laughs) It could possibly happen sure. I've got material written for Death beyond this album, you know, riffs and stuff on tape. So, who knows. There could definitely be another Death album somewhere in the future." [3] Since I've heard the 4 leaked Control Denied songs before, I really wonder what those Death songs sound like. David O. Johnson (talk) 22:31, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Recommend merging Scott Clendenin article with Death (metal band). Quis separabit? 13:09, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

• Somewhat Oppose Support Merge - I'm not sure yet if he is or isn't notable on his own, I recommend placing a {{notability}} tag on his article and giving people some time to provide more sources and text to flesh out his standalone notability before pushing for a merger. Mmyers1976 (talk) 20:18, 26 March 2015 (UTC) - Clendenin's article has been tagged for over 3 months and there is no improvement on it, it is still the barest of stubs. I think it's okay to merge now. Mmyers1976 (talk) 16:59, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support Merge - As written, the article lacks sufficient assertion and independent RS of notability. Agree with tagging to draw other editors who may be able to find and add more sourcing or agree with Merge. JoeSperrazza (talk) 12:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Merger completed. Mmyers1976 (talk) 21:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Death is not melodic death metal

Just because some journalist said that they went "melodic death metal" on their latest records without going into detail about said statement doesn't qualify it as a "reliable source" to apply Death such genre tag, ask any fan or just another journalist and they'll tell you Death went into a more progressive style. To whoever is making the undo, read my justification before undoing whatever I corrected and try forming a counterargument, it makes you look like an ignorant. Death has never been considered a melodic death metal band nor has it properties akin to said genre. Just because it might have influenced certain melodic death metal bands it doesn't mean they were. However, since Human, Death showed a tendency into applying actual progressive elements, all this culminating with The Sound of Perseverance. Listen to any well-known melodeath band and tell me if there's any similarities between At the Gates/Edge of Sanity/In Flames/Arch Enemy and Death. --2800:2121:2000:EDB:3989:C269:1E17:882B (talk) 02:49, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

That's where you're wrong, a respected journalist, writing for a respected publication, is considered a reliable source, and if we were to remove this genre just because of your wishes it would be in conflict with Wikipedia's neutral point of view. Furthermore, please don't resort to name calling, you're much less likely to get your way if you do. Issan Sumisu (talk) 07:11, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Said journalist didn't make a point on why Death was "melodic death metal" and said journalist can also be wrong. It's not my wishes, it's well known consensus. I added links to RateYourMusic where hundreds of users weigh on Death's genre status, but it was ignored. Here's AllMusic, Metal Storm and Sputnikmusic making emphasis on their progressive evolution.

Blabbermouth stating their progressive direction started with Human.

And yes, even Loudwire states Death started developing such style with Spiritual Healing. 2800:2121:2000:EDB:34EE:E434:D93:27C7 (talk) 18:36, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Sputnik and Metal Storm are both unreliable sources and a source saying they became more progressive doesn't make any difference to the reliability of a source saying they became more melodic death metal. Also, the reason that the Rate Your Music source would have been disregarded is because it too is an unreliable source. Issan Sumisu (talk) 18:48, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Three reliable sources: AllMusic, Blabbermouth and Loudwire themselves describing Death's progressive evolution vs. some Loudwire journalist incorrectly stating that Death turned into a "melodic death metal" band without making a point. So what's it gonna be? 200.70.48.144 (talk) 13:35, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

We are keeping the page as it was because that is what the sources support, otherwise it would not have a neutral point of view. Issan Sumisu (talk) 13:39, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

You are keeping the page as it is because even if I explained and provided various sources stating the opposite, which I already did, you would undo at your discretion because reasons. That Loudwire article didn't even explain how Death was melodeath, so far I haven't seen album reviews from a respected music website calling them "melodic death metal". Meanwhile, I provided articles and album reviews that all agree and explain (even the ones you consider unreliable) that Death had merged their technical death metal sound with progressive metal. Isn't that enough to include progressive metal in their genre descriptor? 200.70.48.144 (talk) 13:53, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

None of the sources you provided disproved melodic death metal, it just added that they also went more progressive, because of your sources we can include progressive metal, and it would be better fitting of the guidelines to remove tech death in that case because tech death is a derivative of prog and death metal, which would both already be included. Issan Sumisu (talk) 14:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Melodic death metal

Vague disagreement on this. I personally don’t think this should be in the infobox, so let’s discuss. ~SML TP 00:03, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

whatculture.com/music/death-ranking-all-7-studio-albumsloudwire.com/best-songs-by-band-death/ Here's two very reliable sources stating that, at one point in their career, they played melodic death metal. I think it's pretty hard for anybody to believe that The Sound of Perseverance isn't a melo death album, because it like sounds like a more progressive Heartwork-era Carcass, and Symbolic is also very melodic in places, and the sources back this up. Issan Sumisu (talk) 08:23, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Well if that’s the case, then I suggest you try to protecte it somehow. ~SML TP 14:10, 17 July 2018 (UTC)