Talk:Bring Me the Horizon/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

This article needs assistance and has been spiraling downwards

It's pretty depressing how much of this article got delete for not being well written, origonal reaserch, not source and all those kinds of problems but the real shame is in how little of this article remains since they deleted the majority of the articles work and never replaced it with better written work. This article needs a significant rewrite in order to be good again, it needs sources and to be better written. Here is the idea of what to do: The History secion needs a significant re-write. split it back into its three sections. To save time for some I have put the last version of the article before being cropped down here. And I'm not saying just copy and paste the old version. I mean take the old information, the old sources and add extra pieces. I look forward to seeing if anybody shares my anticipation to improve this article. and besides it's summer now, you have plenty of time to do this guys. Jonjonjohny (talk) 10:30, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

• Yeah, take it back to that one but include parts of the current page that have been added (members appearing on other albums (e.g. YM@6, Admiral's Arms, Deez Nuts) etc.) and I also think the other projects (Purple Curto, Womb 2 da Tomb, Olisaurus (Oli Has a Deathwish)) should get a mention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VampireKilla (talk • contribs) 18:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Previous Sykes projects

Oli Sykes has been drummer singer for a band called Purple Curto and a member of rap group Womb 2 Da Tomb with his brother Tom and Matt Nicholls. All I can find though is Last.FM stuff and Myspace profiles (http://www.myspace.com/purplecurto and http://www.myspace.com/womb2datomb) but the vocals are pretty distinguishable. Also it already gets mentioned in the Discography page with its own side projects section, why can't it be put in the main article? VampireKilla (talk) 19:19, 29 June 2011 (BST)

I know it's oli voice but if you look nothing has been added in four years, five years for the hip-hop stuff. its just a bunch of guys screwing about and hit is a waste of information on myspace let alone wikipedia. they never had any success other than with their fanbase when count your blessings came out. Purple Curto was between oli and his ex girlfriends brother, i repeat EX. meaning they havent done anything for a reason. if for some mirical you find a source that is their own pages it would make sense but even then they have no point being on this page. And also they're crap anyway.Jonjonjohny (talk) 18:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Just because they're crap doesn't mean they don't deserve a mention. It happened, even you acknowledge it. Therefore I feel it should get a mention, even if it's just one short sentence in the "Early years"/"Background" section. Anyway Purple Curto is probably one of (if not the only one of) Oli's first ventures into performing metal.VampireKilla (talk) 19:42, 29 June 2011 (BST)

If you were to create a Oliver Sykes article "Purple Curto" and "Womb 2 Da Tomb" and the other side projects would proberbly deserve a more in depth mention in there these projects dont affect the band as a whole. This Last.fm article give some of his story but DO NOT source last.fm; fact check all of it. Jonjonjohny (talk) 13:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Should Oli Sykes get his own article?

He has done guest vocals for notable groups like Deez Nuts and You Me At Six along with being BMTH's frontman, so does he qualify for a Wiki article? 99.153.87.193 (talk) 08:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Well if Matt Tuck can get one.... VampireKilla (Talk) 20:46, June 29 2011 (BST) —Preceding undated comment added 19:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC).

also try the redirect discussion page here to request it. If you dont' do it today, though, change the date to the date in which you make the request.VampireKilla (talk) 18:18, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request submitted. Jonjonjohny (talk) 18:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

achieved

achieved, not acheived — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.167.54.37 (talk) 00:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, I fixed it. Jer ^{Hit me up} 03:21, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

s/there/their/

"There" should be "their" in this sentence: "and there earlier work is noted" 94.171.245.148 (talk) 04:14, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done cheers for pointing it out. Jonjonjohny (talk) 11:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Objectivity

his article does not come across as being particularly objective. For a good example of an objective band related article look at napalm death Fredmest (talk) 15:04, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Is there a reason you started a talk page section for this? Jonjonjohny (talk) 16:33, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

ALBUM NOT MENTIONED

Where is Bring Me The Horizon's ACTUAL first Album: 'This is What the Edge of Your Seat Was Made For?" ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? DannyMahoney (talk) 01:00, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

'This Is What the Edge of Your Seat Was Made For' is generally considered an extended as it is only four tracks. It has it's own paragraph in the early history section and there is a link in the discography section. Jonjonjohny (talk) 10:04, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Use of 'whom'.

Under the 'YouTube video with Architects' section, there is the statement: ". . . causing many to send hate mail towards Carter, whom later made it clear in an interview with Kerrang! that the whole thing was a joke, as did Sykes." This in fact should be 'who', not whom. Please edit this (I cannot, as the article is semi-protected). Thanks. 146.87.52.50 (talk) 02:25, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done --KЯĀŽΨÇÉV13 01:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

It's back. It says "whom". I too believe this is an incorrect use of 'whom'. 46.126.101.121 (talk) 09:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC) (lKj)

influences

Influences cited for Bring Me The Horizon come from genres like hardcore punk, death metal, grindcore, metalcore, some extreme metal and gothic metal and even some thrash metal and a little bit of nu metal. Bands include Slipknot, In Flames, Carcass, Killswitch Engage, hatebreed, converge, napalm death, and cradle of filth. TheMetallican (Talk)

I undid you edit of adding these bands as influences and quoted content from an interview. The issue with the influenced section of AllMusic is that they never go into detail in how those bands influence said artist. Not only that but the band themselves don't say who has influenced them. It's like sourcing the genres they put in the side heavy metal, death metal & grindcore don't exactly pinpoint this band because AllMusic doesn't use a lot of tags like metalcore. This band hasn't personally cited bands as influences for each album, just styles and aesthetics. And that Ultimate guitar interview as a source is useful, but needs to be incorporated a bit better. And also please sign you posts with the four tildes (~) Jonjonjohny (talk) 23:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 July 2012

Oliver Sykes belongs to Celeste

Cumtwat (talk) 06:53, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Jordan Fish

I think we should say he joined in 2012. Even now there's been no official announcement of his joining, just a "by the way he's definitely in the band for those who were wondering" when Jona left. If he appears credited as a full member in the liner notes for Sempiternal then it's definite that he's been a member since 2012 as the album's been done for a while. VampireKilla (talk) 10:07, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

We all know that Jona left in 2013. Using your logic then are you saying Jona left in 2012? As the album was done at 2012 and he has contributed to it, but no he left this year.

Plus even though Jordan contributed to the album it can be seen as he was a touring / session member. A example of another band doing this that I can think of is Green Day. Their trilogy albums, ¡Uno!, ¡Dos! and ¡Tré! with the joining of fourth member Jason White. He has contributed to those albums but he was only claimed as official member after the albums were done. --121.216.15.125 (talk) 10:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Well I haven't seen the liner notes for that trilogy but if it's credited the band as the original three then and credited him as simply an additional member then that's understandable. From what I've seen from Jordan's songwriting input (hardly something session members normally get) and treatment I get the sense he was an official member right through recording and I expect him to be credited as such on the album. If that's the case then clearly he was a full member throughout the recording (as was Jona - I don't know how you came to that conclusion with that) and if he's only cited as an additional member THEN we can change it.VampireKilla (talk) 11:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's likely that Jordan will be listed as a member, as he was announced as a official member after they finished the album but not before the release date. But we know that Fish was announced as official member at 2013 correct? And was a touring during 2012. --121.216.15.125 (talk) 23:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I think he should be considered as a member who joined in 2012. Being both a session and touring musician for the band he was only missing official confirmation for joining the band as a (at the time) sixth member. His role increased over the writing to the point of being a primary song writer. And also it's easier to say 2012 without over complicating the section with smaller font notes describing his role. And as for what you said about Jona: "Using your logic then are you saying Jona left in 2012". This simply isn't a fair assessment as he posted his doubts on tumblr, just doubts. His role in the development in sempiternal is still noted and he played their three 2012 dates. But he just decided to leave for currently unknown reasons. Jonjonjohny (talk) 00:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Jona's role in Sempiternal

I'm posting this here because it's more likely to get an answer, but the only real source we have to Jona NOT recording guitar is Oli, and we can't really trust the word of someone who clearly has a problem with Jona for some reason or another. Jona was the guitarist for all 3 shows in 2012, when the record was actually being recorded, and yeah, call this OR but I can pick out Jona's backing vocals in Shadow Moses and House of Wolves. Also, I think using Oli's tweets to discredit Jona may count as WP:PRIMARY Crisis.EXE 16:26, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree completely. The removal of Jona from the article's recording personnel is unverified by any other sources than a slating and heavily biased post by Oli. I included those Twitter sources into the article believing the subject would receive more attention, ut right now everything is quiet on that front. BUT even then his name should never have been removed. Jonjonjohny (talk) 01:29, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Fix-up needed

Please fix up the band members section. Something happened to Jordan Fish. Also, why was the timeline removed? --101.174.158.73 (talk) 22:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Oliver Sykes' role

So currently, it states that Sykes' role as both keyboardist and vocalist. But the "Band members" section is for primary roles only. Safe to add (2004–2012) on his keyboards role? Seeming Jordan Fish is the primary keyboardist now. --124.184.178.248 (talk) 22:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I don't see why it's next to his name. It's relevant for the time-line but doesn't need to be their in the roles list. Jonjonjohny (talk) 15:47, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Also I've noticed in the Timeline he is credited as the Keyboardist for the first 3 studio albums, however it least for the first 2, I for one cannot here a thing of keyboard in there (unless I have mistaken). So was he credited as a keyboardist for those albums? Does anyone have the CD cases to prove it in the credits of the booklet or something? - SilentDan297 19:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SilentDan297 (talk • contribs)

Sued for Moshing?

Apparently, Oli Sykes has been sued for starting a mosh pit resulting in an injury of a 12 year old, of which her parents have sued the band and now they are not allowed to start the pits themselves 0.o (Link: http://www.underthegunreview.net/2013/06/23/bring-me-the-horizon-apparently-getting-sued-by-concert-goers-parents/ ) - SilentDan297 talk 12:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

UPDATE

Turns out that they are not being sued however there was some sort of case along those lines, should it be added to this page or should it be added to Oli Sykes under the Controversy section? - SilentDan297 talk 19:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Jona had a small role

Jona did have a small role in sempiternal but was kicked out before the album was done recorded there are images and video of him in the studio at the time of sempiternal MikeyTheEditor (talk) 02:09, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

That maybe so but I have yet to find a rebuttal source. And I found this good Kerrang! printed source where Oli elaborates on his lack of role and why they kicked him out. (was connected to him getting more involved with PETA) Obviously there must be a source eventually from Jona talking about the album. But until then images aren't reliable sources as his parts could easily have been re done. Jonjonjohny (talk) 07:38, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Bridget's Connection With The Band

Bring Me The Horizon is Bridget's favorite band. They are very emo and scream a lot (although she says they are metal and don't scream), they are from some place in England idk where but ok yeah hi bridgey Zekzuka (talk) 18:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

 Not done Inappropriate attempt to vandalise article. ^Myname^isnot^dave (talk/contribs) 18:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit war over members section

Not sure why this page is on my watchlist, I cannot recall the last time I edited it, but I've been watching an edit war develop over the course of the day. TheSickBehemoth is correct in adding headings to the members sub-sections and citing WP:ACCESS. The guideline was recently updated to include: "Do not make pseudo-headings using bold or semicolon markup. Screen readers and other machines can only use correctly formatted headings." As much as I agree that it looks silly, it is a technical requirement of all Wikipedia pages for accessibility purposes. Fezmar9 (talk) 23:29, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I saw what he was getting at after he cited the guideline, so if it helps mobile viewers then fair enough. Jonjonjohny (talk) 08:37, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

It's mostly for issues that arise with screen readers, which is computer software for people who are blind, visually impaired, illiterate or learning disabled. Fezmar9 (talk) 22:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Main genre('s) of BMTH

Every week there has been an edit on the bands genre in the infobox, ranging from: Electronic, symphonic metal, post-hardcore, hardcore, elecronicore etc. Mostly due to the new elements introduced to the bands sound on their latest album Sempiternal, which is unlike any of the other albums they have recorded in the past, so shouldn't there be a standing set of genre's? Rather than the public viewing it each day to see a new genre added or taken away. - SilentDan297 19:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SilentDan297 (talk • contribs)

I'm glad that there is a discussion for this, I believe this is becoming an increasingly difficult situation to deal with. It is obvious that we should base this upon sourced information. However, there isn't many sources that support genres apart from metalcore and deathcore. I cannot comment on why, it could be because of the band it self attracts negative press just to be tagged in a certain way. But ultimately the info box is based upon the most sourced and generally accepted facts. In this case metalcore and deathcore are the most sourced and least contested so they should remain as the only two. There isn't any reliable sources to MY KNOWLEDGE with directly calls them symphonic metal, alternative metal, post-rock, post-hardcore, electronicore or electronica. Another point is that the genres in the infobox should be as ranging or as generalisable of their style for a majority of their work. Even though they have changed style you can describe this in the band article's musical style section or an album(s) "composition" section. I believe any and all sources found to support genres additions should be included below.Jonjonjohny (talk) 00:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree, that way the information is valid and trusted, rather than a hundred odd genre's, un-sourced and/or unreliable, so the two main genres should be metalcore and deathcore unless it is discussed here and there is a trusted and valid source to back it up. - SilentDan297 talk 10:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Can something be put next to deathcore in the genres part saying earlier work, as their newer stuff isn't deathcore, their older stuff was though. Welchy720 (talk) 11:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

2014

As people may have noticed I have now actively removed deathcore from the info box due to the controversy it causes and the fact that for the last two albums they haven't been considered deathcore, nor do they have an intention of returning to that sound. I hope that any counter points are discussed in the talk page rather than kick start an edit war. Jonjonjohny (talk) 09:57, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I disagree with this, sure the recent two albums are not primarily deathcore but the other two are, so half of their discography still remains to be deathcore. I also think because if their legacy we shouldn't remove it, I think the simple: Deathcore (early) would suffice since they where primarily deathcore but now they have moved past that. They also still perform their old deathcore songs. SilentDan (talk) 10:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2014

Change "Bring Me the Horizon are a British metalcore band from..." to "Bring Me the Horizon are a British, Christian metalcore band from..."

Reasoning: analysis of lyrics provides justifications for it being put under Christian metalcore genre.

GoodyearQVGC (talk) 19:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Analysis of lyrics is original research, and I also believe it is not correct in this case. Their lyrics tend to be quite anti-Christian, especially on Sempiternal (e.g. The House of Wolves: "Death is the only salvation you'll feel", just one of many examples).--MASHAUNIX 20:01, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 21:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Adding "early" to deathcore in infobox

The deathcore genre in the infobox should be marked with "early" to avoid confusion; it has been a long time since the band abandoned it. As of now, a note in the infobox says: "DO NOT ADD "EARLY" TO ANY GENRES AS IT LOOKS UNPROFESSIONAL". Can someone explain to me what "looks unprofessional" means and how is it of any relevance to Wikipedia?----MASHAUNIX 21:19, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I have since gone through with this change, adding "early" and removing the note in question. If you disagree, feel free to change it back and explain your reasoning here.----MASHAUNIX 21:02, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

genre

It's put their genre as deathcore and metalcore....drown is more of a pop song.....maybe you should add pop as one of their genres too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmthsuck123 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

One or two singles aren't enough to make genre changes on the band's page; wait for an album release. All genres added should also be backed by reliable sources.--MASHAUNIX 16:46, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Drown is an alternative metal song so this should not be done Syxxpackid420 (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2015

Request to add detail about their upcoming live at Wembley CD/DVD at the end of the Sempiternal section which makes reference to this performance.

Benpsadams (talk) 22:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --ElHef (Meep?) 01:09, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Alternative Metal

Many commentators and fans have been in agreement that since Sempiternal, the group have moved towards a more alternative metal or nu metal sound, so should this be reflected in the band's genre in the infobox? VampireKilla (talk) 12:52, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

If a reliable source such as a published review or article (web or print) is added to back it up, it can be.--MASHAUNIX 15:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Well one thing's certain and they're certainly not metalcore, at least in the conventional sense, anymore. VampireKilla (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Genre of the band?

The happy song sounds different. Sempiternal was different. All previous records were different. I think bring me the horizon should be now mentioned as a "rock" band, like Enter Shikari is mentioned, inspite of the latter being an electronicore band. What do you guys think? SlimShadyLFC (talk) 05:37, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Already covered that in the above section, alternative metal is what they've been described as in recent output. VampireKilla (talk) 08:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2015

The infobox is all jacked up, and the content of which is in the main body of the article. Fix the formatting pleeease. Hallybud (talk) 03:47, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Done Cannolis (talk) 03:54, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Overgenred?

I think there are to much genres in their infobox. Should we just put there genres that are sourced more than once or twice? Or just put them under the umbrella genre Rock? Opinions? Anonpediann (talk) 11:54, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I would just go with the most sourced sub-genres. I could see metalcore and deathcore both staying, but we should also keep a couple more genres in there to reflect their current work, such as alternative rock and alternative metal. Otherwise, I'm fine with the 6 we have in there now. I'll go ahead and look for some more genre sources soon.

Also, I would remove "formerly" and "early" next to metalcore and deathcore in the infobox, as I feel that can just be explained in the prose. I mean, by that logic, we as well add "currently" after the other genres, which we shouldn't. Kokoro20 (talk) 16:49, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree in searching sources for alt metal and alt rock, this is probably which describes better the new sound. For now i found a lot of sources calling them pop metal so i added this as the main genre instead alt metal, alt rock, electronic rock and pop rock. What do you think about it? Pop metal is basicaly a kind of "sub-genre" of alt metal so it redirects there. Anonpediann (talk) 19:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

But pop metal doesn't even have its own article. Stating the genre as alternative metal would be better, since pop metal just redirects there anyway. I went ahead and changed "pop metal" to "alternative rock" and "alternative metal". I'm about to add more sources too. Kokoro20 (talk) 19:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm agree with you but the genres you gave are not valid after all. sources talks about the genres of the album, not ths gobal sound of the band. I'll help you to find the right genres. And what do you think about the new distributiom i gave of the genres on the style section? Anonpediann (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, the album is part of the band. In that case though, there's also sources already cited in the article that calls them an alternative rock and alternative metal band. As for the changes you made to that section, they aren't bad. Kokoro20 (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I added some new sources calling the album alt rock and alt metal and cleaned up the ones that only talked about the album. And about what you said above concerning early and formerly nature i think its important to add it in the indobox because people usually don't pay so much atention to the style section + the majority of the articles about bands and singers cite at least early if necessary. Anonpediann (talk)

Maybe, but generally, we should avoid statements like that in the infobox. How about just keeping "early" for deathcore, but removing "formerly" for metalcore? After all, they only just left metalcore on their most recent album, and the lead already states that. In fact, the lead also states that only their first album is deathcore too, so I would even prefer to remove "early" from that. Kokoro20 (talk) 22:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

What about keeping metalcore without formerly but deleting deathcore from there? I mean, they only have a deathcore album is the genre necessary to be added on infobox? Anonpediann (talk) 09:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I would keep deathcore in there, since that's what they started out with, and we should give recognition to that. Kokoro20 (talk) 17:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I think we should remove deathcore, firstly, as Anonpediann said, because it is only the style of their earliest album and EP, and secondly and more importantly because it is very closely related to metalcore anyway (it is a fusion genre between metalcore and death metal, and extremely close to metalcore; it's basically more brutal metalcore, as metalcore itself has death metal influences to begin with). Removing it would make space for pop rock, which I think should be included alongside alt-rock and alt-metal, as it is not related to either of those, but prominent in their current sound (and sourced well enough).--MASHAUNIX 23:48, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Also, I would not be against removing "formerly" from metalcore, since their entire discography before their one very recent album is rooted in it and they still perform metalcore songs at shows. It is not a convention on Wikipedia to include such tags for genres that were prominent to a band's work and abandoned; take for example RHCP, who's infobox lists funk metal as one of their genres, even though their last 3 albums have not been considered funk metal by anyone. I think the formerly tag was added to this article to emphasise the surprise of That's the Spirit apparently completely abandoning the genre, but such details should be covered in the text.--MASHAUNIX 23:56, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough about metalcore already containing death metal elements, while deathcore just contains even more death metal elements. However, I would still be in favor of deathcore staying listed as a notable genre, due my previous rationale. But yes, whether deathcore stays or is removed, the "formerly" tag should be removed from metalcore. It just comes across as unnecessary to me.

If deathcore must be removed though, I would list electronic rock in its place instead of pop rock, as not only their most recent album has electronic elements, but so does their previous album. Kokoro20 (talk) 20:07, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Sorry but pop rock is very well sourced and in actual terms. Deathcore is to far from their current and even more metalcore-inspired stuff . If we delete pop rock we should delete alt rock too as it has the same usage (only on "That's the Spirit" for now) and same source numbers. Electronic rock just has one source so for now is better to keep it away from infobox. Anonpediann (talk) 01:52, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

You were the one who removed pop rock in the first place, not me. I don't mind it being re-added, and it already has been now. I'm not really in favor of removing deathcore, but if we have to remove any genres, I would rather that one being deleted than the others. Kokoro20 (talk) 03:12, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

I know, i know. I quited pop rock because at that moment there were not enough sources to back it. I just don't want genres to become subjetive. For example, i woud be in favour of adding electronic rock but sources who back it are not enough to list it in the infobox. About deathcore, sources talk about them ditching metalcore, not deathcore. In fact, deathcore is so far in time (they have 5 albums and only one of them is described as deathcore). Anonpediann (talk) 07:52, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2015

In the "genre" section, you should include "Deathcore (early)" Lsidak715 (talk) 03:41, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

The status of deathcore was just discussed in the thread above this, but came to no real consensus. I'm on the fence if it should be listed, personally. But also keep in mind that deathcore is very closely related to metalcore (which is in the infobox) anyway, as explained in the thread above. Their early stuff is also explained as being deathcore in the prose, at least. Kokoro20 (talk) 05:15, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. clpo13_(talk) 20:51, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Timeline / Studio Albums looks messed up

Since the article is semi-protected i can't change it. but i think the studio albums aren't showing right on the timeline. there are some black lines overlapping everything diagonally. AndyCool22 (talk) 20:22, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Done — DLManiac (talk) 23:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2016

they should be listed as deathcore (early) because that used to be one of their genres

184.166.254.183 (talk) 00:11, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 00:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Deathcore in the musical style section

So there is a clash over the use of deathcore in being described as a genre Bring Me The Horizon actively played by the band. There are two, reliable sources that use deathcore in a general description of the band's style. This has been contested by me and Gunmetal Angel for a small period and it's best to take it to the talk page. Personally I find that even if a genre is controversial or redundant it's important to include it anyway then elaborate in the text at what point they were playing that style of music in that period of history. So this is to gain consensus. Here are the two opening statements for the musical style section:

My edit: "Bring Me the Horizon is universally recognized as a metalcore band, as well as being acknowledged as deathcore. The band's debut album Count Your Blessings, was regarded as mainly deathcore album as the band started to adopt a more eclectic style afterwards."

Gunmetal Angel's edit: "Bring Me the Horizon is universally recognized as a metalcore band. Aside from this, the band's debut album Count Your Blessings was regarded as a deathcore release." Jonjonjohny (talk) 18:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

They don't play deathcore anymore and there's even a source that says so. I just don't get why the most sensible thing can't be put on this page because you're against it. • GunMetal Angel 04:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

How is it not sensible to take into account all the genres this band has played as? You can read a musical style section for articles like blink-182 where punk rock is sourced despite being not representative of their style now. Can you produce this source that says they don't play deathcore anymore? Because saying there is a source means nothing. I also know of a source from November 2010 publication of Metal Hammer describing their third album has having influences from deathcore and dubstep. But I'm not going to create a citation for it because the issue is long gone and I cannot quote it. Also I found a biography from MusicMight that calls them deathcore. Jonjonjohny (talk) 10:58, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Obviously that's why I'm saying my version of the page that I wrote in which actually brings clarity that they don't play deathcore anymore is much better than the confusing, sloppy run-on that it has (and for some reason you want to keep) that says "however the band started to adopt a more eclectic style afterwards." Like I said; everybody knows they don't play deathcore anymore and thus I see no reason why it can't say just that on the article. Also, keep in mind the source that says so was found here where Oli Sykes said "deathcore is on its last leg" when interviewed about the recording process for Suicide Season. • GunMetal Angel 04:56, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

That "source" you have produced is a dead link, and I don't think that in the tedious hunt through the Bring Me tag on metal hammer for sources did I ever see an article of Oli saying that (but you know, I may well be wrong). I've posted on the talk pages of a few other editors as clearly this needs more than two opinions. And to say "they don't play deathcore any more" is unsourced opinion, just like "everybody knows they don't play deathcore any more". Deathcore is metalcore with death metal influences right? well they are said to be diversely influenced by death metal, grindcore, and emo and Jona has personally cited At The Gates as an influence. There are three reliable sources which highlight this band as a deathcore band (including the two sourcing the genre and the music might source as shown above). Jonjonjohny (talk) 17:32, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I was invited to partake in this discussion. While I don't particularly care what genre this band is eventually described as, I can say it's very incorrect to say what a band is "universally" described as. This implies every person on the planet believes Bring Me the Horizon is a metalcore band. Even if you found a source that said they're universally described as metalcore, I would find this an impossible claim as musical genres are completely subjective traits. You probably shouldn't be using blink-182 as an example of what should be done in this section. That article is only a B-class and likely hasn't been very well peer-reviewed. A better example of how to write a musical style section would be featured-class articles like: Nine Inch Nails#Musical characteristics and lyrics, Nirvana (band)#Musical style, Meshuggah#Musical style or Radiohead#Style and songwriting. Note that few featured articles (if any at all) straight up say "this band plays this genre." They give a more comprehensive approach that examine musical influences, show how a band's style has changed over time, and bring in the opinions of reviewers while also making it clear that these is are simply opinions (generally opening with John Doe of That Publication said...). It's also horribly flawed to say "everybody knows they don't play deathcore anymore". Readers come to Wikipedia because they generally don't know something about a given subject and want to learn more. Fezmar9 (talk) 19:07, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I was asked by Jonjonjohny to comment on this discussion, so I will give my thoughts. Fezmar already made my first point, but that was when I was in the middle of composing this and got an edit conflict. Anyway, this is what I think. First, I don't like the "universal" claim, as it appears unsourced unless mentioned in the Kerrang! article, which I do not have access to. Unless the Kerrang! article says that the metalcore label is universal, that claim should be removed. Second, while deadlinks can be acceptable, usually first-party sources should be avoided when describing a band's genre, as often genre is used as a marketing and/or promotional tool. It would be okay to mention that Oli Syke's said that he considers the band to be moving away from deathcore, if that is what he actually said, or that the band opposes that label all together. As far as I can see, both metalcore and deathcore should be mentioned, though the sentence structure could use some major improvement. If Oli Sykes said that the band no longer considers itself deathcore, than that is worth mentioning. But extreme caution should be used to not apply original research to what he said, so it would be best to just use an exact quote.--¿3family6 _contribs 19:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

ChavCore... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.142.201.106 (talk) 18:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2016

Request for the addition of Bring Me The Horizon's former genres (i.e. Deathcore) to the "Background Information" box as their earlier albums, like their notable album Count Your Blessings and even albums as recent as There Is A Hell can be arguably considered Deathcore or variants of a metalcore/deathcore transition-sound. Thank you! :) 2601:2C0:C001:3849:8C88:6E43:B746:7BCC (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

 Not done there are 61 uses of genre (62 now) on this page, ignoring the archives, so it has clearly been discussed at length - without an independent reliable source discussing their work as a whole, there should be no changes. - Arjayay (talk) 21:07, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2016

Dangtuwanku rahman (talk) 11:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 12:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 20160

Dangtuwanku rahman (talk) 12:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have still not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 12:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2016

180.253.31.63 (talk) 08:11, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Your request is empty. st170e^talk 12:56, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Let's make this more clear. If you think requesting semi-protected edits is going to get you permission to edit the page, you are sadly mistaken. Wikipedia does not work that way. Someone else will do it for you if your changes are deemed acceptable. One set of edits per request. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 22:22, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Removing Pop-rock in favour of hardcore punk

As stared above, pop-rock doesn't have enough sources. Also, only a few songs on That's The Spirit have been stated as pop-rock.

I'm in favour of adding hardcore punk to one of their genres because on the article, it states that they went to a lot of hardcore punk shows and were influenced by bands that were stated as metalcore, as well as hardcore punk. Another reason is that it also states that Bring Me The Horizon have been considered genres such as; "hardcore punk, technical metal and emo." Reference 88 is a citation of that as well.

Thanks! Wikipageedittor099 (talk)

Thanks for putting a message on the talk page. I have moved it from archive 2 to here, as this is where it's supposed to be (archive pages are just for historical purposes). The band have began producing more pop rock songs recently, and are constantly identified as having moved into this genre with That's the Spirit. On the other hand, Bring Me have NEVER been hardcore punk. This is a genre that they have never played and will never play. The fact that they liked some of these bands growing up means NOTHING. Their first album was always described as deathcore, but this was so brief and so long ago that it's not even included in the infobox. I appreciate starting a conversation on this, but I am reverting your edit once again. Thanks. Andre666 (talk) 08:12, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey, @Wikipageedittor099:. First of all, you don't open up new talk page threads in one of the archives. Instead, you're supposed to click on "Talk" in the upper-left corner, then start a new thread there. Also, be sure to sign your name after each talk page message. I've went ahead and signed your name.

Per WP:BRD and WP:EDITWAR, when people challenge your edits, you don't just keep re-instating your edits over and over. Instead, you bring a discussion up on the talk page, wait for a consensus, then carry on with your edit, not before. If consensus goes against your edit , though, then you are not to re-instate it.

Now, as for the genres themselves, when are they ever actually referred to as hardcore punk, besides that AllMusic review? Going by a Google search, I see sources that states they are influenced by hardcore punk, but none that actually refers to them as a hardcore punk band. Being influenced by a genre is not necessarily the same thing as playing that genre. I did, however, find a few sources that call them post-hardcore, an offshoot of hardcore punk. I say we should list that place of pop rock, instead of hardcore punk. Keep in mind that post-hardcore already includes elements of hardcore punk. Kokoro20 (talk) 11:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Changing them from a "rock band" to an "alternative metal band"

As many people are saying, That's The Spirit was mainly referred to as alternative metal rather than "alternative rock" and/or "pop rock". I strongly think they should be stated as an alternative metal band because of that.--Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 19:50, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

In the lead section, a vague term is often considered more fitting than a specific term. For example, rock or heavy metal would be favoured over alternative rock or thrash metal. These more specific genres can be listed in the infobox and any other relevant sections. If the band are so synonymous with one specific genre then it's fine to state that instead, but with someone like Bring Me who straddle many different genres, a vague catch-all term should be used in the lead, and then elaborated on elsewhere. Andre666 (talk) 20:38, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

If that's the case, would metal work then, or were we planning to stick with rock? I feel more strongly about metal.Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 20:41, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I believe rock is seen as more apt for the band, as things like alternative rock, electronic rock and pop rock are cited in addition to metal genres like metalcore and alternative metal in the press and such. This is especially true of where they are at right now – they were once most definitely a metal band and not a rock band, but now it is very clear that they are both, and arguably more rock with songs like "Follow You", "Avalanche" and "Oh No". Andre666 (talk) 20:46, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm willing to do "metal" or maybe "rock/metal"? There were only a few songs -- such as the ones you stated -- that were primarily stated as alternative rock, electronic rock, or pop rock. Most sources and critics/reviews state it as an alternative metal album, with an exception of "Follow You", "Avalanche" and "Oh No". I loathe to call it a pop rock album as I feel it's more of a "pop metal" album -- which is a label I feel suits them nowadays and the album well -- as they've been called on the Bring Me the Horizon page. I would be willing to call them rock/metal or simply a metal band. I don't feel rock is suitable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipageedittor099 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not sure to what sources you are referring. A quick scan of the album's reviews on Metacritic reveals this: Rock Sound describes it as "arena rock" and "the most important rock album of the decade", not using the word 'metal' once; Alternative Press describes it as "rock" vaguely once, and actually says it is "distant" from their metalcore roots; AllMusic focuses on the "move to the mainstream", which is of course more rock than metal, and generally mentions this factor a lot; Exclaim! mentions metal, but focuses more on the "move to rock"... I don't need to keep listing these, I just want you to see the actual evidence. Those were the first four I looked at and all support rock > metal. Sorry, but it's not what you "feel" works; it is all about reliable independent sources and what they propose. Andre666 (talk) 21:06, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

You're right, I should have worded it properly and should have stated my sources. Here are some sources that list the album and/or the band as alternative metal, or "pop metal": Google, iTunes, Rockbox, Here they're stated as pop-metal and alternative metal, Here they're stated as pop-metal again, Allmusic, Beatcog.com, Independent states it as poppy metal, as do the band. Most of the sources I find state it as alternative metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipageedittor099 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Also keep in mind that heavy metal is a sub-genre of rock music in the first place, so "rock" encompasses both their more rock-oriented work and their more metal-oriented work. "Rock" works fine for the lead, if you ask me. I would be fine with the lead stating "rock/metal" too, but "alternative metal" is too specific, and does it not cover all their work. Their more specific genres are already explained in the infobox and elsewhere in the article. Kokoro20 (talk) 21:36, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Alright, I'll make it rock/metal. I'm fine with that. Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 21:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Rock/metal is unnecessary and messy. As Kokoro20 said, 'rock' covers metal as well, so 'rock' is fine. Andre666 (talk) 21:46, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I'm fine with "rock/metal" as well. Really, either that or just "rock" is fine with me. Kokoro20 (talk) 21:48, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I can make it say "metal" but lead to alternative metal, which encompasses alternative rock and heavy metal? Or I can make it "rock/metal" which is obviously preferable. Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 21:51, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Just leave it as rock, please. Kokoro20 is fine with both, and I prefer 'rock', so that should remain for now. Andre666 (talk) 21:52, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Alright. Sorry for the long debate, guys. Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 21:53, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

That's okay, it's much better that you open it to discussion and try to find a good conclusion rather than simply edit warring! :) You don't often find that. And hey, if plenty of editors come demanding a change, then that's what we shall do. But for now, rock covers it most generally, encompasses everything and is the most concise. Andre666 (talk) 21:54, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Picture

Could I change the picture? You can't see the band well, I have a better picture to upload. Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 22:41, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

If it's a photo you took, or one that is properly licensed, then sure. That one is the best I could find though, and I personally think it looks great. Andre666 (talk) 22:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I removed that photo, as it is taken from a magazine. With all due respect, you really need to do some reading on how Wikipedia works before making such sweeping edits across the site, otherwise you will get into trouble. Don't worry, it happens to the best of us early on in our careers! Check out WP:UPI to start. Andre666 (talk) 22:53, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought it was free-use. Yeah, obviously I'm kinda new to this stuff haha... Would I have to take one live in order for it to not be copyright? I also thought I could use that one because I had put that it's copyright on there? I went through the uploading guide and everything, and filled out the checklist etc. I stated it's copyright but free-use, is it not? Would this be copyright as well? BMTH Live Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 23:07, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that is very clearly copyrighted. You cannot simply take a photo from promotional material, a music video, a magazine or something like that and use it on Wikipedia. It either has to be a photo that you took of the band, or a photo that someone else took and released under a specific license. Please read the copyright guidelines on the page I linked you to, I cannot give you a full lesson on copyright law and its application on Wikipedia. Leave the photo as is; trust me, that's the best one there is that is available for use at this time. Andre666 (talk) 23:09, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Noted, thanks. What if I use a copyrighted picture, but edit it so it technically would be my work, would that count or is that just stupid? xD Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 23:28, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

No dude, that definitely would not count. Editing someone else's image does not make it your image. Andre666 (talk) 23:29, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Deathcore

Why was deathcore removed? It should be included, with the earlier qualifier that is the standard on other articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.219.236.163 (talk) 09:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Genres: adding Hard Rock?

Hi! So, I have multiple sources stating Bring Me the Horizon as a "hard rock band". I'm gonna add it and cite sources. If the sources are invalid or if you want to talk more about it please reply to this with your concerns and/or thoughts. I also personally think a lot of the songs on their recent album are hard rock as well. Thanks! Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 14:33, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm sure you could find many cited genres on the internet, as they are such a popular band. I think we need to stop adding them where we are at the moment, with alternative metal, metalcore, alternative rock and post-hardcore. Generally speaking, hard rock refers to bands like AC/DC, Guns N' Roses and Led Zeppelin, which mix blues with rock and a bit of metal in a pretty straightforward, "classic rock" manner. BMTH do not fit that, and do not fit into the "hard rock" scene generally speaking. I would oppose this addition personally. Andre666 (talk) 14:40, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

This can also refer to American Active-Rock oriented bands, but BMTH just doesn't fit in there. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 14:48, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Addition of deathcore to infobox

I am aware that the band no longer play deathcore, however due to their first EP and LP being heavily cited as the genre (and multiple sources for Suicide Season), I feel it should be in the form of: deathcore (early) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Issan Sumisu (talk • contribs) 12:34, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

metal band instead of "rock band".

Hi, so I know I've brought this up before, but I want to bring it up again. Last time, Kokoro20 stated that alternative metal wouldn't cover all their work, and I get that, so I believe it should be at least a "metal band", as "metal" covers all their work. Many bands like Bring Me the Horizon have their genres more specificly stated than Bring Me the Horizon does, that also makes me wonder why? I get that their sound varies, but "metal" would cover it without being very vague. Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 20:55, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Their latest album is not a metal record; most of its songs have little to no aspects of the genre. Furthermore, even on their earlier albums, they have been at least as much influenced by hardcore punk (besides other genres) as by metal, and weren't a metal band in the traditional sense of the word. Rock, on the other hand, goes well to describe their latest album as well as being a general category that can accommodate their earlier work. So I would definitely oppose this.--MASHAUNIX 19:00, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I would argue their latest album is often kinda half-assed on the metal end. It's definitely there. There are enough strong deviations from it that it definitely wouldn't count in there, though. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 22:56, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Bring Me the Horizon. 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/20110609025336/http://www.gigwise.com:80/article.php?contentid=25949 to http://www.gigwise.com/article.php?contentid=25949
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/67dcDWYqc?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ariacharts.com.au%2Fpages%2Fcharts_display_album.asp%3Fchart%3D1G50 to http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/charts_display_album.asp?chart=1G50
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120111150412/http://rawtuneage.indiestar.tv:80/2011/12/bring-me-horizon-collaborates-with.html to http://rawtuneage.indiestar.tv/2011/12/bring-me-horizon-collaborates-with.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121029235535/http://www.kerrang.com:80/blog/2012/10/bring_me_the_horizon_name_fort.html to http://www.kerrang.com/blog/2012/10/bring_me_the_horizon_name_fort.html

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) 16:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

wembley 2015?

it says bring me the horizon performed at wembley arena and recorded it in 2015. it was december 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.14.237.211 (talk) 19:36, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Updates to Live at the Royal Albert Hall

The last paragraph of the section "That's the Spirit and Royal Albert Hall show (2015–present)" needs editing. The information is outdated as the CD, DVD, audio/video download, vinyl, and BluRay was released last week, and the punctuation/sentence structure is just awful. I'd do it myself but the page is semi-protected.

46.183.103.17 (talk) 10:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Why not create an account and make it in your sandbox, and have someone copy-paste it when you're done? Us Wikipedians are busy you know. Or if it's more minor, just tell us specifically what needs done. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 13:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Heavy metal?

Idk if it's valid or not but I found a sputnik music review calling them heavy metal? http://www.sputnikmusic.com/review/58706/Bring-Me-the-Horizon-Sempiternal/ Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 15:00, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

That's a user review. Only staff reviews from SputnikMusic are reliable. Even so, heavy metal would be rather redundant for this band, since metalcore and alternative metal are already listed, both of which are subgenres of heavy metal. Kokoro20 (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, wasn't quite sure. Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Removing alternative rock?

I can't find many valid sources calling Bring Me the Horizon an alternative rock band, but there are many that use "rock band" And "alternative metal band". While I acknowledge That's The Spirit is more of an alternative rock album, the band is not sourced as alt rock, validly. Sorry if I post about the genres too much, but I can't find many valid sources for them being an alt rock band. If anything, pop rock has more citations than alt rock. Can it be changed? Thanks! Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 22:01, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm an idiot

Looking back at the sources I provided for post-hardcore, there's only two, and one of them only refers to the album itself. Can it be removed, unless anyone has any more valid sources, I couldn't find any either than the Fuse.TV one. Thanks, and Happy Holidays! Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 21:31, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

One is enough for inclusion in the article, but generally not in the infobox. So I'll remove that first one. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 21:38, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Heavy metal

please change ((heavy metal)) to ((Heavy metal music|heavy metal)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:541:4304:E6B0:218:8BFF:FE74:FE4F (talk • contribs)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 14:58, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

rock/metal or metal band 19:02, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Now that they've been referenced 3 different types of metal, can we call them a metal band? Or at least rock/metal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipageedittor099 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

The intro genre should be as general as possible, metal is a form of rock and hence you are including metal by calling them a rock band. Issan Sumisu (talk) 08:20, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Bring Me the Horizon. 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/20131004214223/http://drownedinsound.com/directory/labels/Thirty_Days_Of_Night_Records to http://drownedinsound.com/directory/labels/Thirty_Days_Of_Night_Records
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gigwise.com/article.php?contentid=25949
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111007050808/http://news.mibba.com/Music/1232/September-Is-Suicide-Season to http://news.mibba.com/Music/1232/September-Is-Suicide-Season
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/charts_display_album.asp?chart=1G50
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://50.97.158.82/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=165433
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://rawtuneage.indiestar.tv/2011/12/bring-me-horizon-collaborates-with.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.kerrang.com/blog/2012/10/bring_me_the_horizon_name_fort.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 22:27, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Main Image Update

I recently updated the main image to Bring Me The Horizon.jpg which shows all current full time members of the band close up vs. an older live shot that's too small to show the members effectively. This contribution was undone by User:Bowling is life as it was "not an improvement" which I'd dispute — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philbbirch (talk • contribs) 11:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 January 2019

Please change the word "acronym" in the first sentence to the word "initialism." An acronym is pronounced as if its constituent characters created a word while the individual letters in an initialism are sounded out. I believe the original author intended to say initialism as it is not trivial to pronounce "BMTH" as a word. Equinox64 (talk) 00:52, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done DannyS712 (talk) 05:00, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Pop

I think pop should be added to their genres. Loudwire said they’re a pop band, and I found a few otbers that said it’s no longer fair to call them a rock band.

I agree that pop should be added but seven genres in the infobox seems like overkill, so I believe it would be best to either replace an existing genre with pop (in which case I'd argue post-hardcore should be removed) or make the infobox more general to something like heavy metal (to encompass alt metal, metalcore, melodic metalcore, nu metal and technical metal), hardcore punk (to encompass metalcore, emo and post-hardcore), rock and pop. Both of which would be per Template:Infobox musical artist. Issan Sumisu (talk) 18:59, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

In that case, it would make more sense to list pop rock (which is also cited) than plain pop. If anything, I would support the removal of deathcore, and replacing that with pop rock. They haven't been deathcore since their second album, and as discussed before, deathcore is very similar to metalcore anyway. Kokoro20 (talk) 19:34, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't know, pop totally encompasses pop rock while the same can't be said the other way around and theres six sources currently on the page referring to them as deathcore, whereas post-hardcore only has two. Issan Sumisu (talk) 19:39, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree with adding pop, but we should replace deathcore. TTS could even be argued to be post-hardcore on some songs, so I wouldn’t remove post-hardcore. ~// This is a contribution by The Edit King 👑 \\~

Pop rock would make more sense than pop. Pop rock has more sources and deathcore should still be kept. Also, generalizing the genres down to just heavy metal, hardcore punk, pop, and rock would not be a good idea. That doesn't give a good description of their sound. Bowling is life (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

I’m fine with pop rock and pop, in replacement of deathcore and post-hardcore. Or even simply pop rock. They do have enough pop songs to be sourced in their genres though. ~// This is a contribution by The Edit King 👑 \\~

Pop rock should be addded as it has enough sources and importance to be included. Bowling is life (talk) 06:56, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

There definitely appears to be a consensus for pop rock to be added but Template:Infobox musical artist still recommends between two and four, so before it is it appears best to remove something. Of the two mentioned, post-hardcore has three sources (one of which only calls one album post-hardcore), and there's definitely an argument to be made that Sempiternal is the only album in that genre, whereas there's six or seven sources calling them deathcore and their first two albums and one EP are sourced as such. Issan Sumisu (talk) 08:22, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree with removing post-hardcore in favour of pop rock. I also think the genres should be re-arranged in sort of relevance. (ie; Pop rock, alt rock, alt metal, electronic rock, metalcore, deathcore.) ~// This is a contribution by The Edit King 👑 \\~

The order doesn't really mean anything, at least I've never seen anybody talk about rearranging genres for relevance before now, do people really think that has merit? Issan Sumisu (talk) 15:51, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Linkin park

I think that Linkin park is an obvious influence on this band and I don't see it mentioned at all on the article.

Reference https://www.kerrang.com/features/oli-sykes-of-bring-me-the-horizon-on-chester-bennington/ Tiagoalc (talk) 11:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

POST-HUMAN - A full length album

After initially promoting the release as an EP, the band now calls it a full length album here: [1]

Apparently people still think because other sources haven't changed the initial promotion from an EP to a full length album, it shouldn't be changed here. But if a band is claiming to have released a full-length album, how is it not accurate to say that they have released a full length album? And I don't understand the terminology "commercial release" that is used instead. A commercial release can be a live-album, an EP, a compilation, a full length album, etc. In this case, the band have directly stated that they now think the album is a full length album, and a third party source has published this statement. So I see no logical grounds in holding on to the EP claims, or refraining from stating what in fact the band has stated publicly.Solino_{the Wolf} 21:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't have time to do a full on discussion right now but to get the discussion going I'll tag @Wikipageedittor099: and @Tobi999tomas: to join in on the discussion. I just don't have time right now to make a well crafted response. I'll join in the discussion sometime tomorrow when I have more time. Bowling is life (talk) 23:05, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

I agree with your point, and concur in changing it to studio album. At first I disagreed, and was comfortable calling it a commercial release, but after further review and consideration based off the band's claims, I can agree it's an album and should be considered as such. --~// This is a contribution by The Edit King 👑 \\~ 22:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

My problem with calling it a studio album is that so many sources call it an EP. Most of the sources in the review section of the Post Human: Survival Horror call it an EP. Examples: [2], [3], and [4]. Try finding one source that calls this their seventh studio album. I couldn't find any. I know the band are saying they probably shouldn't have considered it an EP but the band also said they would never make another full-length studio album ever again. Plus, it was originally promoted and released as an EP and most consider it as such. So, it would make sense to use a neutral term since there isn't a consensus on what it is exactly. That's why I think we should just stick to calling it a commercial release like we did with Music to Listen To... It is widely known that this isn't their seventh studio album. Most sources are calling an EP or mini-album, with very few calling it an album and none are calling it there seventh studio album. Bowling is life (talk) 22:54, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2021

Add Post Human: Survival Horror (2020) to the Discography section 2003:C1:571A:9358:4D13:3640:F1FE:99BF (talk) 17:42, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Not done: Only studio albums go in this section. Post human is not a studio album. Post human can be found in the history section of the article or at Bring Me the Horizon's discography page under other commercial releases. Bowling is life (talk) 18:04, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Nu metal to be included in the infobox?

Post Human: Survival Horror in various different sources has been primarily described as nu metal as has songs on That's the Spirit. Band member Jordan Fish has also called and described Bring Me The Horizon as a nu metal band. Would this be acceptable on these grounds to add nu metal into the info box? --GeorgeKnight201101 (talk) 18:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I think the fact that alternative metal is already included kind of covers that base, because nu metal is a subgenre of alt metal and it's more general per the infobox guidelines. If nu metal does get included, it'd be best in that case to remove alt metal, because they're describing the same point in the band's progression and seven genres in the infobox would be far too excessive. Issan Sumisu (talk) 17:20, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Look at the page for Linkin Park, both nu metal and alternative metal are included within the infobox. If they warrant the inclusion of both, then what about Bring Me the Horizon?--GeorgeKnight201101 (talk) 20:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Because there's already six genres listed in the infobox and twenty-one in the musical style section, and Template:Infobox musical artist says to "preferably use two to four" and "aim for generality". Issan Sumisu (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with Issan Sumisu. The genres we have listed cover it. Nu metal is a subgenre of alternative metal any way. Bowling is life (talk) 22:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Genre update

I propose we move the "Metalcore" genre to beside the "deathcore" in the infobox, since they haven't been metalcore in over a decade and I would argue we should place Alternative Rock or Alternative Metal first, since those are more recent. Wikipageedittor099 (talk) 17:12, 5 September 2022 (UTC)