Talk:Shinedown/Archive 1

Entire Rewrite

This article clearly needs to be entirely rewritten, as it's currently a glowing review of the band. Anyone with the knowledge to do so, please do.--Elmer Clark 01:46, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Done and done. It seems extremly mindless for someone to ignore the rules, take advantage of the "Anyone Can Edit" concept, and post their own personal opinion on a website meant for information viewing. Vollman or whoever you are that has posted such a thing, keep in mind that if you want to post an opinion, please do it somewhere else. User:zel_rogero] 04:19 PM 25 November 2005

Rewrote it, yet again. :) --Discharger12 20:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

3,500 albums a day?

Is this a valid claim? Should there be a footnote verifying this?

Who has seen Shinedown in concert?

I just seen them in concert @ Piere's in Ft. Wayne, IN. They headlined with Seether in the "Winterfresh SnoCore Tour" There were four bands total who played. I had never heard any of the 4 bands music before and after one performance of Shinedown I was totally hooked! I went out and bought both of their cd's and their dvd, too! I totally recommend seeing them live in concert and buying their cd's and dvd! Does anyone know where I can buy any of their t-shirts or hoodies? I can't find anthing of theirs in all the local stores where you would see them around here. Have a great day! Iloveredheads 06:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

--I couldn't go, as I'm not 21 yet. :( Piere's sucks. --Rattletrapmusicman 19:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Shinedown live

Shinedown rocked at the Sno-Core tour. Seether (of course) sucked and a lot of people left after Shinedown finished up, heh, but that's alright. Flyleaf and Halestorm were both really good. I have to say though, Shinedown is one of those bands that's better live than they are on CD -- seeing them live gives you the opportunity to get the full effect.

Fly From the Inside

Someone deleted the picture I uploaded even though I fixed the copyright issue.... can someone fix that for me? --Discharger12 22:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Southern post-grunge

I hear nothing "Southern" in Shinedown's music. And only a vague post-grunge sound. This statement needs to be verified with a source. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.91.104.103 (talk) 13:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

I hear "Simple Man", "45", and "Heroes" as Southern Rock tunes. Especially "Simple Man", even if it was from another Rock band. -Goldenfox17-

not sure what they mean by post-grunge, [they labeled breaking benjamin as the same thing] but i do hear a bit of southern-ness in their music Inuxshinedown 01:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Christian rock?

The beginning of the article states that they are a "Christian Hard Rock" band. I've never heard of them being a christian band before. In addition to that some of their lyrical themes seem to contradict this.For example, "Lady so Divine" has been hinted at is a metaphorical ode to LSD by their lead singer.

hmm never heard that before . i've gone over both their cd's , and i havent heard them curse once, so i guess you could say "christian rock" i mean, it's nopt like it'll bother fans or anything Inuxshinedown 01:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, their latest (at least the limited edition, I've only noticed swear words on the bonus tracks) is explicit. Members of the band (particularly Brent) thank God in the liner notes (the "Shinedown would like to thank" section towards the back), but the music is hardly Christian in content... although drugs and religion aren't necessarily mutually exclusive... Steve h (talk) 07:59, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

They are not a Christian band. Brent has stated in many interviews that all of their songs are about real life issues, not necessarily about god or religion. The reason Brent never really curses in his music is due to respect to his mother, I'm told from the ShinedownNation message board. FenderGuitars777 20:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.41.88 (talk)
...HAVE U HEARD THE SONG SON OF SAM???!!! it totally shows that they're not a Christian band Son of Sam Lyrics
cheese (talk) 20:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

They definitely aren't Christian rock on "The Sound of Madness" even without the bonus tracks they do swear. (In Cyanide Sweet Tooth Suicide they say "Fuck the silver Let's go straight for gold") Not to mention the bonus tracks (Son of Sam and Energy)

Shinedown is NOT A CHRISTIAN ROCK BAND. Honestly, I'm getting tired of this. This has been an ongoing problem for about ten years now. Young rock fans with born-again Christian parents encounter the problem of not having any music that they dig in the "Christian-rock" arena... it's a problem because the only music born-again Christians approve of is Christian music. Everything else is labelled "secular" and is deemed unacceptable to Christians. So young Christian rock fans search for any music that doesn't have curse words, where the lyrical content doesn't refer to sex, drugs, and partying, and they label it "Christian" so it will be acceptable to their parents. This has been a problem with bands like Creed, Evanescence, and now Shinedown--NONE OF WHICH ARE CHRISTIAN BANDS. A Christian band is more than a group that doesn't sing about sex and drugs. Conversely, just because the lyrics don't contain references to sex and drugs, DOESN'T MAKE THEM A CHRISTIAN BAND. I STRONGLY recommend removal of the reference to Christian rock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Troydayton (talk • contribs) 16:48, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

? Maybe this was on the article recently, because it's not there now. And on Cyanide Sweet Tooth Suicide they do cuss it seems, but for some reason on the album booklet thing's lyrics if says "Not the silver..." yes (talk) 23:41, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh God give me a break. Does swearing mean that you can't be a Christian rock band? Does swearing make you un-Christian? And does lyrical themes of suicide mean that you can't be a Christian rock band (if so Skillet can't be Christian rock, yet they pray in concert and have strong Christian influences). Give me a break. I'm tired of people labeling Christians as some neo-conservative people who have no outside influences, and can't swear. As for Shinedown, they aren't Christian rock, but discrediting them as non-Christian just because they have dark lyrical themes or because they swear is ridiculous. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 23:56, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Leaveawhisper.png

Image:Leaveawhisper.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Usandthem.jpg

Image:Usandthem.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fly from the inside

"Fly from the inside" was on the video game "MX vs ATV unleashed" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.111.164.146 (talk) 00:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

picture

does anyone got a picture of them, if someone should put it in —Preceding unsigned comment added by Astrongguy (talk • contribs) 18:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

the Zach Myers issue

It has been recently reported that Zach Myers is a member of Shinedown after being with the band for 3 years now . Any and all updates should wait till the *2008* album release —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.49.175 (talk) 21:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Page Update / Revamp

This morning I have revamped the page, subcategorizing and amending the biography, adding dates to the members section which will let readers see the duration of peoples tenure with the band, reworking the display of the album information, placing much of the trivia information into other, new sections and also adding some references. Please let me know what you think; I'm fairly new to editing articles, and this is my biggest job yet, so it would be cool to know that I've done things well, and more importantly, correctly. --Lovemonk. (talk) 10:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Zack Myers took full advantage of Jasin's friendship and ripped him off big time. This is not a friend you want to have in the music business. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.235.228.139 (talk) 21:23, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

"Legendary" Live performances

Tagged that line, it looks out of place without a citation. Iron Maiden's legendary for their live shows but no one's tooting that horn on their wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.76.128.217 (talk) 21:27, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Bad writing

This article is full of bad writing. The first two paragraphs are just sad...no citations, opinions, and conjecture. Every other section is just a bunch of one-liners strung together without any kind of formatting. This article desperately needs a full rewrite. Also, I just deleted the blurb about "Junkies for Fame" being the next single because the song is actually "Second Chance". 71.82.127.156 (talk) 03:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I've just gone through the article and cleared bits up, reworded things and gutted a lot of crap. There were quite a few incorrect dates in there regarding RIAA certification which have now been corrected. The article still needs more work, so feel free to continue the work. --Lovemonk. (talk) 18:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Nick Perri

Nick Perri left the band today (December 18, 2008). I have updated the article on Wiki, but I'm not sure how to cite things. Can someone edit in a citation for me? I got the info from shinedown's official site. FenderGuitars777 20:32, 18 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.41.88 (talk)

Jasin Todd

There isn't anything on Jasin's leaving the band, shouldn't there be? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.176.10.88 (talk) 05:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Revamp Needed

I think the Sound of Madness section needs condensing, although it is difficult with a lot of it being still current news. Also, the LAW section should be expanded; topics such as 45's controversial video, going platinum, simple mans downloads, impressive number of shows they played etc could all be touched on. Lovemonk. (talk) 14:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Missing Song

Why isn't Cry For Help listed? it is a great song! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.225.252.111 (talk) 17:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

influences

should Alice in Chains be added to their influences? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.203.158.243 (talk) 02:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

If cited in a reliable source. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 20:46, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

on the rolling stone page it says that alice in chains is an influence to shindown —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.151.53 (talk) 03:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

NU METAL???!!!!!

Shinedown does not fit the nu metal genre. Allmusic is often inaccurate when it comes to musical styles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.159.77 (talk) 01:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I think they get lumped in with "nu-metal" because their first album was released, and popular, right at the heighth of the nu-metal movement. Beyond that, their sound isn't that much of a stretch... Sergecross73 msg me 12:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Get rid of the nu metal bit. Allmusic is a pile of shit and always will be. NEVER GO TO WHAT IT SAYS IN THE MUSICAL STYLE BIT.

You'd be more persuasive if you'd act a little more civil and not command people or write in all-caps... Sergecross73 msg me 13:08, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Shinedown.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Shinedown.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 10 July 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:42, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Genre - 2013 discussion

So, much like just about any half-known band article, there's on-going arguments and edit warring over the band's genre. As much as I don't like how it's constantly tinkered by passer-by's, I also don't necessarily agree with the recent trimming down to only "alternative metal". So, lets discuss and come on a consensus, and then enforce it as such.

1. What genre should/should not be included?
2. What reliable sources do you have to prove it? (You can't just say "Well, its sound like this." This is Wikipedia, we go by sources, not by our own personal interpretations of songs. Sergecross73 msg me 16:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• Rock

1. IGN
2. Loudwire

• Hard rock

1. Allmusic description (not from its genre list, so its useable)
2. Melodic
3. Sputnik Music (Written by staff, so its usuable.)

• Post-grunge

1. Rolling Stone
2. Artist Direct Sergecross73 msg me 16:49, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I am the one that trimmed to down to the only sourced genre that was there, not taking much scrutiny into the source, since there was no musical style section. To have set notable genres for the infobox, we should have at least three reliable sources calling Shinedown a "____ band" or calling their overall music one specific genre. None of the sources should be related to the sound of one singular album, but their music in general. Since genre is a WP:SUBJECTIVE thing, we would need more than one source to include it in the infobox. I completely agreed with changing it to Rock in the meantime though. STATic message me! 17:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

With as many sources as I'm finding with just some brief initial searching, I'm thinking Rock/Hard Rock/Post-Grunge are going to be relatively uncontroversial additions. It's more of these fringe theory genres (referring to them Southern rock, Christian rock, nu-metal, etc) that are going to take a lot more effort to add. (None of which I'd be pushing for, unless future sources found are drastically different...) Sergecross73 msg me 18:10, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

These piece might be an interesting read, interesting it is just from two months ago. This may be a case where we should just generalize with Rock, or from my own research the most significantly used sub-genre is Hard rock. STATic message me! 21:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Huh, interesting, a band member himself commenting on the ridiculousness of this article's genre. That'd probably actually make a good quote for. "Musical style" type subsection. At the same time, it shouldn't necessarily null out other sources accounts of being a genre either; we shouldn't be going strictly by 1st party accounts. (If we did, there wouldn't be any glam, emo, or nu-metal bands ever, because just about all artists deny they're part of a genre once there's a huge backlash on it. Or they'd all be pretentious nonsense genres. The Smashing Pumpkins once declared themselves "American gothic", which had a strong consensus against its use because...well, it's not even a real genre.) Sergecross73 msg me 01:08, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I just thought it was funny that a band member actually commented on it, not necessarily saying we should follow his words and not include any of the genres he specified. A very large majority of reliable sources I found referred to them either as the generalized "rock", which I am a fan of using, see Template: Infobox musical artist the genre should be generalized. I really like how 95% of rappers articles just say "hip-hop" rather then try to squeeze in all the subgenres. But if a little more detail needs to be used, the majorly used sub-genre seems to be hard rock [1], [2], [3]. STATic message me! 04:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

No, that was a very interesting article, thank you for posting it. Yeah, I support rock and hard rock, and probably wouldn't put up too much of a fight if people really want to list them as post-grunge either. (They're listed as a leading example at the post-grunge article, and there's sources to support it too.) I'm against most of the other extraneous ones being added (any of the variations of metal, southern rock, Christian rock, etc). Sergecross73 msg me 12:47, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Well @Sergecross73:, since Hard rock and post-grunge are sub-genres of rock, there would be no reason to list rock, along with one of the sub-genres. We would either generalize with "rock" and list nothing else, or use a sub-genre. Since it has been a few days with no comments from anyone else, I am going to go ahead and change the genre to Hard rock, along with a hidden note pointing to the talk page if anyone else has an issue with the genre. I will also be watching for any WP:OR or WP:GWAR to the section.STATic message me! 23:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll probably only add post-grunge and all of its sources if people start edit warring over it or something, as it would probably settle that fight... Sergecross73 msg me 00:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

As suggested, I may as well have my say. I don't think it's very accurate to have only hard rock in the infobox. They also cross into alternative metal and post-grunge, much like many 2000's hard rock bands. They are commonly referred to as by those three genres, as evident by the sources in the prose. If anything, more people would probably just keep trying to re-add those genres anyway. I mean, alternative rock, heavy metal and Southern rock were listed before, which were really stretching it (and they don't seem to be as commonly described as them either), but the other two I mentioned should be fine.

According to this source, "Shinedown has been called melodic hard rockers, alternative metal and intense.": http://www.pressherald.com/archive/film-songs-could-make-it-hard-for-shinedown-to-stay-humble_2010-01-27.html Kokoro20 (talk) 21:41, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

While I'm partially concerned that it didn't come up at all in my earlier search, there are quite a few sources that call them alternative metal as well. I don't mind adding it unless User:STATicVapor has a good argument otherwise... Sergecross73 msg me 13:59, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Reliable sources seem to refer to them as an alternative metal quite frequently, I would not mind with listing that in the infobox. STATic message me! 17:03, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

See, @Kokoro20:, its quite easy if you follow the process and join in the discussion. Problem solved, and now future people can consult this conversation in the future. Sergecross73 msg me 17:23, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Alright then. I'll go ahead and re-add them. Kokoro20 (talk) 00:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay now, so what about post-grunge? As with those other two genres, many sources describe them as such and they do have their share of softer songs that would be better described as that than hard rock or alternative metal. Kokoro20 (talk) 01:45, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

As much as I feel its excessive to describe such a straightforward band with 3 different genre...I also said I wouldn't oppose post-grunge if it was being pushed for because sources do use it... Sergecross73 msg me 01:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

It is excessive, I do not know why we cannot just decide on one, or at the most two. I would be happy with just listing rock on most band's articles instead of always arguing about different subgenres, as there will always be sources that classify band's under different genres as not all their songs will sound the same. I mean Template: Infobox musical artist/doc, prefers a generalize genre, that is why I like in most BLPs for rappers we just use Hip hop as their genre instead of gangsta rap, east coast hip hop, psychedelic hip hop, trap, jazz rap, etc. STATic message me! 01:49, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Three genres is not that bad at all and if numerous sources describe them under all three genres, I see no good reason to exclude them. It's not like I'm asking to include all the genres that were previous listed or anything. Kokoro20 (talk) 06:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Please let discussion take place and consensus be achieved. Disruptively changing it before the discussion has ended is not going to earn you any praise. Maybe if you had a stronger argument, or argument at all for that matter, to list it I would not have a problem with listing it, but I do not see a reason to crowd up the infobox when it is meant to be a summary of the major points of the article. STATic message me! 08:12, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I've already given my arguments to include post-grunge multiple times. I really don't see how three genres that are widely sourced is "crowding up" the infobox and besides listing it would cover a "major point" of the article, because it has multiple sources in the prose, so it is still summarizing. Kokoro20 (talk) 09:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I do see Static's point. I can understand listing multiple genre when there's these bands that have spanned three decades, released 6-10 albums, and go through different phases with their album sounds. (Smashing Pumpkins, Linkin Park, Radiohead, Porcupine Tree, etc.) But that's not the case here. They don't rap sometimes. They haven't put out an electronic album. They haven't put out any drastically different albums. They're a very mainstream, straightforward, rock band, who does a couple ballads per album. It seems excessive to take three genre to sum that up... Sergecross73 msg me 13:41, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Exactly what I am saying, their sound has never had a major significant change to warrant three or more genres in the infobox. Why have three when we can just choose one, or at most the two of the most significantly used genres, to describe the band in reliable sources. STATic message me! 17:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, so that's what you mean. Well, while Shinedown are not very diverse, I think those three genres should fine for reasons I have previously stated. Many 2000's mainstreams rock bands are considered to be within those genres. It doesn't make any sense for post-grunge to be in the prose with three sources, but not in the infobox and could just confuse people. Kokoro20 (talk) 20:30, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I've seen this approach (1 broad genre in the infobox, then a music style section listing/detailing some other ones) used on a number of different band's articles, and it seemed to work just fine. (Except for the genre warriors, but they're never really happy...) Sergecross73 msg me 15:14, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Genre - 2015 Discussion

I had noticed that Synthwave.94 recently tried adding post-grunge again and that got me thinking that we should have a new discussion on this. Go ahead and either support or oppose this addition with your rational.

• Support: Per my comments in the previous discussion. While they might have a "straightforward sound", some people might not consider them hard rock or alternative metal, but just post-grunge. The sources for post-grunge in the article backs up anyone who considers them a post-grunge band. I support having all three genres listed. Kokoro20 (talk) 06:09, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose - they have a very straightforward sound, there's no reason that it would take 3 genre to describe it. What next? Shall we add rock, alternative rock, and melodic rock too? Any more redundant terms we can add? It's unnecessary, especially with a musical styles section. Sergecross73 msg me 12:59, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
• Support : the genre is already backed by several reliable references in the section "Musical style" and is even mentionned in the post-grunge article (see last sentence). And as I said in one of my edit summaries the genre is not even considered controversial for the band. Synthwave.94 (talk) 20:45, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
• Comment: Perhaps I should start an RFC for this? I can't see anyone beyond us three commenting here. Either that, or I could post on different editors of music article's talk pages about this discussion (without canvassing, of course). Kokoro20 (talk) 21:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
• Comment Can someone articulate why exactly another genre is necessary? Like, what aspect of their music is not covered by hard rock and alt metal. How is this helping the reader exactly? Sergecross73 msg me 00:24, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, they do have a number of softer songs, which hard rock or alternative metal couldn't really cover. Post-grunge is often used for those types of ballads that Shinedown do. Post-grunge is characterized as having a more radio-friendly approach, as mentioned in the genre's article. Not all of Shinedown's music is that hard and heavy. If anything, it would confuse the reader as to why post-grunge is mentioned in the musical style section, but not listed in the infobox. Kokoro20 (talk) 00:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

It would improve consistency between the infobox and the "musical style" section of the article. I always make sure genres cited in the infobox are sourced somewhere else in the article (and vice versa, that genres sourced in the article are mentionned in the infobox). This is the main reason why I think "post-grunge" should be listed in the infobox, along with "hard rock" and "alternative metal". Synthwave.94 (talk) 01:43, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

I fully agree. I can understand if like 10 different genres are mentioned in the musical style section to try to trim them down in the infobox, but 3 genres shouldn't be a problem at all. Kokoro20 (talk) 02:08, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

The infobox isn't meant to cover everything covered in the "Musical styles" section. Generally, the infobox gives a main genre or two, and then the musical style section fills out the full picture. And there's nothing inherently non-mainstream about hard rock or alt-metal, so using post-grunge to cover that doesn't make sense. Post-grunge isn't a synonym for pop rock or ballads anways. And like I said in the 2013 discussions, I'd understand if it was a band like Linkin Park or Porcupine Tree, who had gone through many stylistic changes and genre-bending sounds through their careers that are hard to define. But that's not Shinedown at all. They started with a simple sound, and it really hasn't changed significantly through their career. Say what you will, but what I say is consistent with featured articles like Smashing Pumpkins and Tool (band). The problem is that no one's every bothered to clean up or maintain this article like the others. Sergecross73 msg me 04:57, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Like I've said, if only 3 genres are in the musical style section, I don't see the problem with listing them all in the infobox. If it's something like 10 genres, then it would be more understandable to leave a few of them out of the infobox. Besides, most bands are multi-genre, and Shinedown are no exception. The Smashing Pumpkins seems to be a special case, since they are pretty much universally cited as an alternative rock band and that alone. Kokoro20 (talk) 05:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree that having more than 6 genres in the infobox may be a lot, but I really don't see any problem about adding a third genre in this article's infobox, especially when it is already mentionned in sourced. Also consistency is more important than your personal knowledge about the band. I noticed you mentionned featured articles like Smashing Pumpkins and Tool, but there are several FA (such as Alice in Chains, Godsmack, Jimi Hendrix, Nine Inch Nails or Powderfinger) which mention three genres or more in their corresponding infobox. So where is the problem about mentionning "post-grunge" in the infobox ? Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:55, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

His main concern seems to be that Shinedown has a more straightforward sound, which he believes shouldn't take 3 or more genres to describe. I can see where he's coming from as Shinedown really are not that diverse, but I disagree with listing only 2 out of 3 genres in the Musical Style section based just on that. I agree with your "consistency" point. Kokoro20 (talk) 20:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

The band's sound may have a "straightforward sound" which didn't change a lot thoughout its career, but it's not a valid reason to let "post-grunge" outside the infobox. Synthwave.94 (talk) 22:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Have you read the music style section? Band members themselves laugh at how many excessive genre are added to the Wikipedia article. If you want to slam the article with redundant genre, fine, but be prepared to maintain it, as there's always a ton of editors tinkering with the band genre, and I'm certainly not wasting my time with such frivolous maintenance. Sergecross73 msg me 12:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes I read this section, but it doesn't matter what the band think about its own Wikipedia article. I understand fighting genre warriors may be a hard task, but it's not a problem for me. I think it's time to restore "post-grunge" in the infobox now. Synthwave.94 (talk) 17:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, that article was made back when even more genres were listed. So, I guess this is resolved now. I'll be sure to revert any genre changes on sight too. Kokoro20 (talk) 19:51, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Genres

Alternative rock should be added as there has been alot of songs and some albums by Shinedown that can be considered alternative rock. Campingfreak3599 (talk) 16:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Please read the massive discussions on this in years prior. They have a very basic sound that is easily described with the current3 genre. (Honestly, the current 3 is excessive in my opinion. They play very straightforward, mainstream, basic rock music.) Sergecross73 msg me 17:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I will do that. Campingfreak3599 (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Source for future cleanup

http://www.blabbermouth.net/search?page=95&post_type%5Bcdreview%5D=true&post_type%5Bdvdreview%5D=true&post_type%5Bpost%5D=true&s=shinedown

Mostly for myself for future reference, but in case anyone else wants to look through it too: Blabbermouth.net (reliable per WP:MUSIC/SOURCES) has a pretty extensive archive of articles, and I've used it in past band article rewrites because they cover a lot more from the early to mid 2000s than many online websites typically do nowadays. There's a lot of pointless articles to wade through (there's a hundred pages of articles, but they tag the band every time the band or virtually any of their members or production staff are mentioned in passing, a lot amount to nothing) but there's some good stuff in there too. Just an FYI. Sergecross73 msg me 17:01, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

2012 "New album recorded" comment

In 2012, shortly after the release of Amaryllis, Brent Smith made a comment at sources like this that the band already had another new album recorded. However, Threat to Survival, the next album, didn't come out until late 2015.

Are there other sources describing what happened here? I assume they didn't sit on a completed album for 3 years. Did they rework it? Scrap it?

I'll start digging once I get around to rewriting that part of the article, but I was just wondering if someone already knew off-hand. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 19:20, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Here's a source about them taking 2 years off before Threat to Survival, though still no real explanation about this comment. Sergecross73 msg me 17:00, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Attention Attention album title

This keeps getting added to the article. I can't find this anywhere. Was it said somewhere obscure? Or is this just vandalism/hoax info? It seems like if they announced an album title, every rock website, and half the all format ones, would be reporting it all over the place... Sergecross73 msg me 17:10, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

It was announced today. Not sure who these anonymous people were who were adding it half a week in advance, but whatever, its settled now. Sergecross73 msg me 14:21, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Source

• http://loudwire.com/shinedown-the-sound-of-madness-album-anniversary/ Sergecross73 msg me 23:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)