Talk:Uriah Heep (band)

Russia Behind the Iron Curtain

Article incorrectly states UB40 was the first band to play in Soviet Russia. Several bands did play there occasionally, with Iron Maiden touring extensively behind the Iron Curtain in '84, including Czech, Poland, Bulgaria, hungary & Russia

Expanding history

I quite believe we should breakdown the history section into different era's of the singers. We could start of with Byron, then Lawton, Sloman, Goalby/Fontain and then Shaw. Duckpatch 21:29, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Right now the narrative of the band basically consists of two paragraphs — the first two in the "history" section — so I really don't think we want to divide what we have now. If you're going to make some substantial additions, then it might be worth subdividing. Even then though, I'd start-out thinking about dividing in two (Hensley & post-Hensley maybe, or perhaps Byron & post-Byron). Content is what's most important. ×Meegs 22:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The name -Uriah heep- What it means?

No one knows what name Uriah heep means, and what is the origin of that name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.215.200.145 (talk) 14:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Uriah Heep is a character from David Copperfield [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.105.55.170 (talk) 20:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

German hits

I think the phrase, "In Germany, their biggest hit was "Free Me", from the 1977 album Innocent Victim." needs some qualification or refernecing. Is this from chart position? Copies sold? I live in Austria and have visited Germany extensively. My German and Austrian friends exclusively mention "Lady in Black" from the Salisbury album if I mention Uriah Heep. Judging from the awesome response that Lady in Black gets from live gigs in Vienna and the fact that "pop" song books all have the tabs for it in them in these lands I would go for Lady in Black as their biggest hit here!

Candy 12:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I've removed that sentence altogether. You're right, it's best not to have it without a reference. ×Meegs 06:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Gary Thain

Bassist Gary Thain was fired from the band and replaced by John Wetton prior to his death; text indicating that one of their bass changes resulted from his death has accordingly been deleted.

I've reverted this addition back after it was deleted. The deletion was not explained and as Thain was a significant character in the young Heep line-up and featured heavily on their early songs I still consider it worth mentioning. However, please delete it IF someone can explain to me why it should go. Candy 07:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

It was deleted because it is factually incorrect. Thain was NOT replaced because of his death, he was fired in February 1975, largely for a drug problem, and was replaced by John Wetton in March 1975. Thain did not die until December of that year. This can be confirmed on Uriah Heep's own website: http://www.uriah-heep.com/newa/heepstory5.php

I stand corrected .. sorry. But please help by placing comments for deletions. Candy 11:50, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

you know, they're still pretty popular in israel too. i remember that they had a tour there and the tickets were all sold out and the stadiums were packed.

Merge from Heepster

Please merge relevant content, if any, from Heepster per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heepster. (If there is nothing to merge, just leave it as a redirect.) Thanks. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-11 00:29Z

No disbanding

Hi guys. Nice 'work in progress' here. Heep didn't actually disband after the line-up featuring Dechert split, although the future didn't look bright at that point. Only Box and Bolder remained and Trev couldn't hang about and accepted the offer to join Wishbone Ash, of course. It had been suggested to Mick by the record labels that he form The Mick Box Band or similar, guitarist-led bands being en vogue at the time. Apparently he called Lee to wish him luck for the 'Diary Of A Madman' tour, only to find that Lee and Bob Daisley were both out of the band. That set him thinking... There's a good 'Abominog'-era interview in Kerrang! where he talks about this. I've seen it scanned online, so I'll try to find the link.

Kerrang! did report that Heep had split sometime after the 'Equator' tour but this was not so. Again, I'll see if I can put my hands on the cutting. I remember being upset, then very pleased to find it wasn't so.

Cheers, Al (England)

PS If it helps, I'd always heard that the re-release of 'Lady In Black' was their big hit in Germany. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.128.253.156 (talk) 04:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

Progressive metal

They can definately qualify as one of the first prog metal bands. Allmusic states, "Uriah Heep's by-the-books progressive heavy metal made the British band one of the most popular hard rock groups of the early '70s." and I have a book here called, Rock The Rough Guide, that states, "This was a band who almost defined the concept of a heavy metal prog-rock cliche"(I know that's it's a put down, but it helps prove that they are one of the firsts in the subgenre). I think it should be mentioned that they were one of the firsts or a precursor to prog metal. Opinions anyone?Rockgenre (talk) 00:45, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Since you have two references for this, there is plenty of incentive for it to be included. Be Bold, say I.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Members bar chart

Hi, I've made a chart of the members in my user page User:Mister_pink2/heep/. At the moment the dates are only approximate, maybe someone who knows the dates better could refine it and include it somewhere. Mister pink2 (talk) 16:16, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Lady in Black, german charts

"In the late 1970s the band had phenomenal success in Germany, where the "Lady in Black" single spent 13 weeks at #1"

Now that's a joke, Lady in Black never was no.1 on the official single sales charts in Germany. It's been a big hit though, entering the charts 3 times, in 1971 (no. 24), 1975 (no. 44) and 1977 peaking at no. 5 with a total run of 31 weeks in the charts in 1977/78 alone.

there might be better ones (like Musikmarkt resp. Media Control), but here's 1 source: http://musicline.de/de/chartverfolgung_summary/artist/URIAH+HEEP/single

--92.224.86.152 (talk) 13:32, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

further on in the article: "three Uriah Heep singles sitting together in the German Top 20, these being "Wise Man" (from Firefly), "Lady in Black" and "Free Me""

Wise Man has not been listed in the german charts at all, but it's true that Lady in Black and Free Me were in the Top 20 at the same time. Free Me entered the TOP 20 last week of December 1977 (eventually peaking at no. 9), when Lady in Black stood at no. 5 for the second week.

same source as above.

--92.224.86.152 (talk) 14:07, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

• Have they been given the Golden Lion award in Germany at all? Because it says (here), as well in Kirk Blows' bio: In 1977 it topped the German charts for a massive 13 weeks, keeping Paul McCartney's Mull of Kintyre off the number one spot, a feat which earned Uriah Heep the Golden Lion award, the German equivalent of a Brit Award. I'll begin by changing the preamble (where such details are not necessary) but still very much hope that there could be (or have been) perhaps some kind of 'Rock' sub-charts in Germany... Otherwise - strange faux pas for Blows. And yes, thank you very much for pointing this out. -- Evermore2 (talk) 14:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

There have been several charts on radio stations or music magazines and the like, with votes by their listeners/readers, but these are not considered official german charts. The only official singles sales charts was compiled by "Musikmarkt" until ~ 1977 or so, then by "Media Control".

I only know Golden Lion, german "Goldener Löwe", as a film award, but Lady in Black won the "Goldene de:Löwe von Radio Luxemburg in 1977.

--92.224.86.152 (talk) 14:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

The only official singles sales charts was compiled by "Musikmarkt" until ~ 1977 or so, then by "Media Control". - So there was some kind of transformation circa 77? Could there have been some sort of re-evaluation of data?.. Anyway, since the official chart see them placed at #5, so it should be. Won't you like perhaps to do all the necessary change yourself in the article? You seem to be well informed in the German-related matter, while I'm totally at a loss - especially when it comes to the Two Lions dilemma :)-- Evermore2 (talk) 15:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Changed it myself, please feel free to correct whatever might be wrong. -- Evermore2 (talk) 07:50, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Grammar

A lot of this article sounds as if written by Yoda, it was. Someone should tackle making it sound like written by a native English speaker, they should.Tao2911 (talk) 17:30, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Mercury's "Best of Uriah Heep" album

Apparently this is discontinued, but after the band left Mercury records in the US, Mercury released a Best Of album. This was released in the mid 70s. I used to have the album but no longer have it.Jtyroler (talk) 09:05, 7 September 2011 (UTC) link to album info: http://heepfiles.info/search2/compil.htm Jtyroler (talk) 09:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Logical Revelations

Uriah Heep released and album in 2012 called Logical revelations with a track listing of

1. Everything in life 2. Against the odds 3. Time of revelation 4. Universal wheels 5. Logical progression 6. Words in the distance 7. Between 2 worlds 8. I here voices 9. In thee moment 10. Shelter from thee rain — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.18.30.123 (talk) 00:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Who exactly compared Heep to Sabbath, Zeppelin and Purple? They are a good band but I have never once heard them described as the "Big Four" or compared to the other three groups! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob77 (talk • contribs) 11:44, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

The Big Four

The article refers to Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple and Uriah Heep and then states that "...people like to call these four bands "The Big 4" of Hard Rock." That just simply isn't true and having a link to an article on some tiny Internet 'magazine' which has only existed for 2 years doesn't make it so. Uriah Heep are a great band - I'm not disputing that - but the fact of the matter is that while Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, and Deep Purple are often referred to as "The Big Three" of heavy rock, and the progenitors of heavy metal, Uriah Heep are never mentioned alongside them except in this one obscure article. Maybe they should be - an argument could certainly be made - but the bottom line is that they're not. There are numerous reference to "The Big Three" of Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath,and Deep Purple - it's quite common - but "The Big Four", as far as bands are concerned, are considered to be Slayer, Anthrax, Megadeth and Metallica.

I think the article needs to be changed to remove that statement and the accompanying link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FillsHerTease (talk • contribs) 04:54, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Uriah Heep is hard rock not heavy metal

I'm aware that every statement needs a reliable source. But the thing is that in the early 1970s the term "heavy metal" was often used as synonym to the term "hard rock", and in many sources from that period you can find calling Uriah Heep "heavy metal". But later on, when emerged the style which is now called "heavy metal", the terms "hard rock" and "heavy metal" were acclaimed as separate genres. Allmusic.com uses the term "heavy metal" as synonym to "hard rock" (as it was usual by music critics of early 1970s), but after it was acclaimed that Uriah Heep/Deep Purple/Led Zeppelin are hard rock and Iron Maiden or Accept are heavy metal. So, allmusic.com is reliable source but represents only one tradition of definitions. Uriah Heep are of course hard rock. And the style definition on this page earlier was closer to truth - "progressive rock, hard rock, heavy metal" ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.68.202.160 (talk) 20:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

You should have stopped posting after "I'm aware..." - nobody's interested in your personal opinions. Heep played many "heavy metal" songs and this is supported by numerous references out there, and this is the only thing we as editors consider. HammerFilmFan (talk) 22:51, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Uriah Heep pioneered a prototypical form of what is presently the subgenre of 'Power Metal'. Additionally, simply because Heavy Metal has altered in the near half-century which has followed the formation of initial groups such as Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Heep, et al., their styles were nonetheless still 'Heavy Metal'.

Also, by the early 1980s, Uriah Heep purveyed a significantly more modern arena 'Heavy Metal' sound on albums like 'Abominog' and 'Innocent Victim'.

Lastly, it should be noted that the album covers of the U.S. versions of their first two records were some of the earliest major LP releases to feature quintessential metal art style (e.g., skeletons, serpents, demons, etc.). CrownColin (talk) 13:44, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

• Sources say heavy metal and progressive metal. NOT hard rock. 68.185.2.34 (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Musical style

The term Heavy Metal wasn't invented, or at least not very much in use, during "Very Eavy,Very Umble", "Look At Yourself" etc. "Hard Rock" (which may equal the first wave of British Metal, but never was referred to as that)81.230.36.59 (talk) 02:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

• Fuck your opinion. I don't care how much it hurts your feelings, the sources ONLY refer to Uriah Heep as a heavy metal band and one source for them as a prog-metal band. NOTHING referring to them as a hard rock band. Ergo, they are a heavy metal band. Because that's what the sources say. "I FEEL" is not evidence. TheRealBoognish (talk) 07:14, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Allmusic referring to the band as progressive metal

"The band's sound began to change as well, with subsequent offerings like Fallen Angel and Conquest leaning more toward commercial AOR rock than progressive metal"

TheRealBoognish (talk) 05:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

"Leaning towards a genre", does not state that the band is part of either genre. Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:28, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Sold 40 million albums? Really?

I don’t believe this statement, which is in the intro, and I’m going to remove it unless someone can come up with a good reason not to. The only source provided is the band’s own website, and there it isn’t referenced. But looking at the chart positions table, well, some comparisons with other bands imply that it’s no more than a claim. Compare the table for the band Yes. 70 million albums, several no.1’s. The intro states great success in Germany in the late 70s, but the album chart positions don’t bear this out either. If there had been, it would help to explain 40 million. Topping the charts in low population countries such as Finland doesn’t help a great deal. Boscaswell talk 23:34, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

No one can be that stupid

This article is written in British English, and correctly makes use of the semantic plural in saying, "Uriah Heep are... ... ...". "Over the years the band have included as members... ... ..." is not correct in British, or any other variety of English. This sentence is talking about individual members, not the collective whole. Also, the hidden comment: "DO NOT CHANGE" is entirely unacceptable. I added the words "please" and "without talk-page consensus". I even left intact the entirely unnecessary ALLCAPS screaming. It's fine to alert editors to the fact that there is long-standing consensus about a particularly contentious issue, and that any changes will require previous discussion and approval. Flatly telling editors that they are forbidden to change something is a no-edit order, which is itself forbidden by policy. Joefromrandb (talk) 14:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Past members

Why is Ken Hensley the only person listed in the infobox under "past members"? Jah77 (talk) 10:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Should the article have a hatnote?

I've recently removed a hatnote from this page, which pointed users back to Uriah Heep (the Dickens character), in accordance with WP:NAMB (basically, hatnotes should not be used on pages with disambiguated titles). @Tserton: has commented on my talk page:

I was aware of the WP:NAMB guideline when I made the edit [to add the hatnote], but I think this is a case where it would make sense to ignore the guideline. At least in my location, a Google search for Uriah Heep returns only the band (both wiki results and otherwise) - even several pages of results in. This (a) makes it more difficult for people looking for information on the Dickens character to find the Wikipedia article (a lot of people find Wikipedia articles through google searches, not the main page) and (b) leaves a sizable number of people uninformed about the non-musical usage of the term. This might be a case where following Wikipedia legalese to the letter is at odds with informing the public. I figured a hatnote was the simplest solution short of converting the Uriah Heep article into a disambiguation page.

I think this is the appropriate venue to continue the discussion. Creating Uriah Heep (disambiguation) might be a solution, if neither the band nor the character are the primary topic - see WP:TWODABS. Any further input will be welcome. Tevildo (talk) 18:22, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for picking up the discussion. For what it's worth, the band consistently gets three to four times more views than the Dickens character, which would argue for making the band the primary topic (although part of the disparity is probably attributable to the aforementioned Google bias). A disambiguation page would be fine with me too, though, and might be the better option considering the band is named after the character. --Tserton (talk) 06:45, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

If there's no objection, I'll make Uriah Heep a disambiguation page Uriah Heep the primary topic in the coming days/weeks. --Tserton (talk) 11:29, 15 May 2022 (UTC) Edit: For the sake of consistency, I've had a look through similar cases (i.e., bands much more famous than the thing they're named after — examples are Belle and Sebastian, The Velvet Underground and Death Cab for Cutie) and in those cases, the band is always the primary topic. That way we can also put a hatnote on the band page linking to the character without running afoul of WP:NAMB. I don't have strong feelings about it, though, and I'll wait a week or so for potential objections. --Tserton (talk) 19:04, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

I think Jethro Tull is a very relevant example. That term has disambiguation page, with only two topics. See discussion of that at Talk:Jethro Tull (band)/Archive 3#Requested move 15 January 2018, which concluded that the band should stay at Jethro Tull (band). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:16, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Making Uriah Heep a disambiguation page would be fine with me as well. I don't have a horse in the game other than fixing the status quo :) Tserton (talk) 09:48, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

If the RM discussion is in favour of keeping the status quo, I think it's OK to override WP:NAMB for this page - perhaps with an added comment referring to this discussion. Tevildo (talk) 21:39, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Uriah Heep which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)