Talk:Crossover thrash

Speedcore

I find the Pushead quotes from MRR interesting. He calls it "Speedcore". Should it be mentioned Speedcore once was an alternative tag for Crossover-Thrash bands?--==== — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.220.77.7 (talk) 13:09, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Thrash

Back in the day, we just called DRI, COC, etc. "thrash" (before "Crossover," which was 1985 era) because kids who listened to that music were thrashers or skateboarders. Maybe make a note of that? Conservationist666 (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Untitled

I think Crossover thrash should have it's own page because it was a very influential genre. Here's some examples of genres it gave rise to:

• Grindcore
• Groove metal
• Metalcore
• Youth crew

They are important genres! (Well, 1st and 3rd are). It also influenced:

• Crust punk
• Deathgrind
• Sludge metal

So, any ideas? π₰₯ ĬLʡ$Φǚɭђµπt₴ŗ ₯₰π 10:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

My design for the page is here: User:IL7Soulhunter/Sandbox/Crossover thrash --π₰₯ ĬLʡ$Φǚɭђµπt₴ŗ ₯₰π 22:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

created page Metal of Head 22:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

List

I'm glad this page has been added. However, lists are not encouraged in Wikipedia articles of this sort -- see Wikipedia:Embedded list. It would be better to include lists of crossover thrash groups in sentence forms, contextually grouped according to geography or style. Aryder779 (talk) 04:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Should this article be moved?

Bands like Suicidal Tendencies, Corrosion of Conformity, Agnostic Front, etc. and thrash metal with a little bit more hardcore punk is more often called punk metal than "crossover thrash." See Piero Scaruffi and allmusic for instance. Crossover thrash is used much less and it's also a term that could cause confusion (for instance a thrash metal band like Metallica crossovered over to a wide audience, so one might accidently put them into this category.) I suggest we move this article to the punk metal page (the current state of that page is total OR.) RG (talk) 03:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Uh, not really. The term "crossover thrash" is much more popular and widespread (on last.fm, for example, 15,000 people have used "crossover" as a tag and and another 1000 have used "crossover thrash", while only 1,200 people use "punk metal". Also, punk metal and "metalpunk" is often used for a new scene metal mostly influenced by crust punk and Darkthrone's newest albums. A couple of places using the "punk metal" term doesn't mean that it's the only one used. SonOfPlisskin (talk) 20:00, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Crossover bands

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

An anonymous IP user has been deleting bands that are generally considered as crossover. He claims there are no sources, but is actually deciding himself what should or shouldn't be considered for the list. There are many other bands without sources that he doesn't seem to have a problem with. The only one that there doesn't seem to be any "reliable" source for is Lawnmower Death, so we'll leave that band out for the time being. I'd like someone do check the sources for Dead Horse and Hellbastard and see if they're alright. He also seems to have a problem wth Hirax, despite there being reliable sources. I'm including this for comment, because the user continued to revert my edits without trying to discuss it here SonOfPlisskin (talk) 00:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

hell bastard are Crust punk from 2009 Book reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crust_punk

dead horse are Death Metal Grindcore Alternative Metal Heavy Metal as per allmusic Quite more reliable than "blabber mouth" . http://www.allmusic.com/artist/dead-horse-mn0000222011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.152.45 (talk) 22:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

lawnmower death are Thrash metal in their Own Writing https://www.facebook.com/pages/Lawnmower-Deth/222850577726503?sk=info https://www.facebook.com/pages/Lawnmower-Deth/222850577726503 68.39.152.45 (talk) 22:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

hirax "Heavy metal, Speed/Thrash metal" as per allmusic quite reliable http://www.allmusic.com/artist/hirax-mn0000681354 68.39.152.45 (talk) 22:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I'm going to address your points since they're all so simple:

"hell bastard are Crust punk from 2009 Book reference" - Bands can belong to more than one genre. In fact, if you're going to discount crossover bands for playing naother genre, you're going to have a very short list. Also, one source claiming that something is "X", doesn't mean other sources claiming it's Y should be discounted. Look at the Mudvayne discussion page, for another editor who made the same mistake.

"AMG stuff" - You're not supposed to use the sidebar genres. AMG doesn't even have a crossover tag. If you're going by that, then no bands are crossover, and D.R.I. is Alternative/Indie. Also, no "more reliable" nothing. Blabbermouth is a reliable source. The Hirax article which is what counts, mentions crossover.

"lawnmower death are Thrash metal in their Own Writing " - Whatever happened to not using artist's own bios? At least Hirax had their own site. Anyway, I didn't even add Lawnmower Deth this time. SonOfPlisskin (talk) 23:29, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment. Per WP:BURDEN, the IP editor is free to challenge any unsourced text that he feels does not belong. I would support the removal of any band that does not have a reliable source. It can be re-added later if a reliable source is located. There isn't much point in arguing over whether a band does or doesn't belong to a genre unless there are reliable sources involved. Sources to a Facebook page, even an official one, are not good enough. It has to be an actual third party source. I could make a Facebook page that calls me a famous cross-over thrash artist, but that doesn't make it so. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:15, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I haven't been using Facebook pages. The IP has been using them to prove they don't belong on the list. I've added reliable sources to four bands that the IP editor wants to remove. Also, note the list below. The idea was that until we got sources for all those bands, they wouldn't make it onto the main page, but the IP user doesn't want to play. SonOfPlisskin (talk) 11:53, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Include Everything Greetings, I was called by the 'bot. There is no good reason not to include the information that the anonymous IP is removing, the "crossover bands" being described are legitimate bands in that they aren't fictitious. They should not be removed however a citation needed hypertext should be applied if the citations and references to the bands are weak. The RFC-requesting editor has provided legitimate citations so "lack of citations" is not a legitimate reason to delete text.

Also when there is an anonymous IP address being utilized to delete content, weight should be applied toward reverting such deletions, more so when there is no significant or legitimate reason why such deletions were performed. A legitimate editor is one who creates an account so that the editor's changes, deletions, and additions can be tracked and evaluated by the wider editor community, and anonymous IP addresses and their edits should be treated with suspicion.

Lacking any real reason for the anonymous deletions, they should be reverted and the text covering the bands should be retained. Damotclese (talk) 14:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

• The bot sent me. Use WP:GNG as a guide. The IP's behaviours in making selective deletions seems dodgy to me. I agree with Damotclese that can be used and bands can be kept, also Google the bands, look for general notability to back that up. Delete those that do fail GNG. For possible sources, look at back issues of 944 magazine. They had music issues that came out a few times a year. And the Observatory in Costa Mesa has a website that might be a good resource. SW3 5DL (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

List of crossover thrash bands

This is the list that was on the page. Articles need sources that people agree on before they go on.

• The Accüsed
• Agnostic Front
• A.N.S
• Attitude Adjustment
• Beowülf
• Biohazard
• Blunt Force Trauma
• The Brood
• Carnivore
• Cerebral Fix
• Concrete Sox
• Corrosion of Conformity
• Cro-Mags
• The Crucified
• Crumbsuckers
• Cryptic Slaughter
• Dayglo Abortions
• Dead Horse
• Discharge
• Dr. Know
• D.R.I.
• Excel
• The Exploited
• Eyesburn
• Final Conflict
• Gang Green
• Hatebreed
• Hellbastard
• Hirax
• Hogan's Heroes
• The Icemen
• Lawnmower Deth
• Leeway
• Life of Agony (early)
• Lobotomia
• Ludichrist
• Madball
• M.O.D.
• Mucky Pup
• Municipal Waste
• Nuclear Assault
• Prong
• Ratos de Porão
• Send More Paramedics
• Short Sharp Shock (SSS)
• Sick Mother Fakers
• Soziedad Alkoholika
• SSD
• Stormtroopers of Death
• Suicidal Tendencies
• Sworn Enemy
• This is Hell
• Uncle Slam
• Vegan Reich
• Verbal Abuse
• Void
• Wehrmacht
• What Happens Next?
• Yellow Machinegun

SonOfPlisskin (talk) 23:29, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

You don't "own" the page . Consensus is that list has been there for years . not for a self important person to claim ownership of the page and do what they want with it . Section blanking is a serious issue. you're apparently having an OCD and haven't waited for anyone to respond to your request . Thats procedure. Thats how things work . When working TOGETHER with others . Not for one persons point of view who Changes genres at every page they see fit to get a band in a list . You work at earache or metal blade or are in one of the bands most likely .68.39.152.45 (talk) 23:37, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I think you missed this line "Each band needs to be sourced to be included on that list." And don't give me that "working together" stuff. You're refusing to accept reliable sources just because you don't like it. SonOfPlisskin (talk) 23:43, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Raed the edit page , hell bastard have a 2009 Book Reference says they are not Crossover in a wiki Article. You asked for a mediator . then you go off for hours changing everything in sight and section Blanking . I hope this is old and not after what we just got done discussing via a talk page . have a nice day 68.39.152.45 (talk) 01:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

This is where we discuss whether bands should go on the main article or not, not delete bands you don't agree with. I actually found a Russian translation of the Hellbastard section of that book online (if anyone wants, I can link it), and it seems that it mentions that Hellbastard are crossover. I'm not going to reference it, because online translations aren't trustworthy, but I'm definitely going to try and get my hands on that book. The translations I get are "HELLBASTARD was one of the founders of metal-punk crossover wave that swept UKHC scene at the time" and "this album is a great example of how good the phenomenon can be punk / metal crossover", though it would be better if someone with access to the book could weigh in on this. Either way, even if it specifically said they're not crossover, it doesn't negate other sources saying they are. No one is denying that they were a crust band. Crust can be mixed with crossover as well. If you disagree with something, then mention it here to discuss, don't just delete it. SonOfPlisskin (talk) 01:53, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

a lot of them aren't crossover anyhow . learn what that is first . instead of finding references that back up YOUR , POV, such as changing all the bands articles that no one really cares about, to be "crossover thrash" they aren't . no one is "playing" except you . 68.39.152.45 (talk) 17:41, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

There are reliable sources saying they are crossover. End of story. Deleting sources from the pages under the pretense of "correcting grammar" is outright vandalism and now I will report it as such. SonOfPlisskin (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

You went and change bands genres on the Articles to meet your Own POV . Have Fun with that .68.39.152.45 (talk) 17:23, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

You ignore reliable sources to meet yours. 'Nuff said. SonOfPlisskin (talk) 18:00, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

References

thrashcore

the phrase The term "thrashcore" to distinguish acts of the genre from others was not coined until at least 1993 is not valid. There was a fanzine in USA, called Thrashcore, since 1988 and i had seen the term in Metal Forces too, during the 80s. 62.103.243.86 (talk) 14:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)