Talk:Billy Talent
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Billy Talent, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the band. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can add your name to the list of participants. Feel free to add tasks to the below list by editing this template.
|
Contents |
[edit] Billy Talent Category
In terms of the categories this article has been listed in, I would argue that Billy Talent is hardly a hardcore punk group. Inanechild 23:48, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
I agree, Billy Talent is not a punk Rock group, they are more of a hard rock. Punk music barely hits the mainstream with the same impact as Billy Talent did.--Quena@sympatico.ca 00:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Not quite, Watoosh (while they were Pezz) was an odd form of punk rock, and their first album as Billy Talent had distinctly more emo influences, making them sort of hardcore punk (since emo is based off hardcore punk). They aren't hard rock, that's apples and oranges. Anyway, overall, the only consistent thing you can say is that they're a punk band. --24.223.144.215 20:28, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
i don't think he is a punk-rock person
Agreed, Billy Talent looks just like another Simple Plan or Blink 182. I believe "Punk Rock" is becoming more of a look than a genre of music. Correction officer06 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Guys, if you're gonna have a valid argument, you need to back yourselves up. Nobody here has anything besides complaints about mainstream punk. Hard rock isn't hardcore. "punk rock" is a genre, not a bunch of mainstream emo bands. Hopefully I'm not picking a fight here, but there's nothing here to suggest anything should be changed.--128.146.68.89 18:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, I really don't want to be brought into this argument. Music arguments always degenerate because they can't be resolved, it's all a matter of perspective. That said, I'm going to carefully state this. Punk rock has more diversity than mainstream emo bands display, and some 30-years of history. They cannot be defined by some emo band like Fallout Boy. It's unfair to make broad generalizations, especially considering you seem to be only familiar with popular emo bands you dislike.
- This is all beyond the point. An argument on what punk rock "is" should be in the Talk:Punk_rock section. It doesn't matter here because none of this changes Billy Talent's genre. The Internet doesn't need another meaningless argument, I won't post here again.
- On a side note, I thought you were referencing The Dickies, which is ironic beyond belief. Can't say I've ever heard of Dickies clothing. --128.146.68.89 00:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
It does not matter what so ever if they are punk-emo-hardcore-whatever. That has nothing to do with any of it being that those lables are just for organizational reasons. What really matters is what the lyrics and sounds and voices make you feel. That's why they call music a strand of art. It is a piece that will give you stong vibes of emotion. Like Nothing to Lose- is about a kid being teased and bullied at school then commits suicide, Devil in a Midnight Mass- is about a child predator working as a preist. Bands are not at all about trying to 'be something'. It's about making an impact on people to find emotion in a topic. -Erica-Jean M. -15 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EJ MACZ (talk • contribs) 21:24, 24 May 2006.
and that's relevant to the article how? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.222.254.9 (talk • contribs).
They are definitely a hradcore punk band and not a "modern rock" band. Their sound is very little like emo - any similarities are coincidences, because almost every musical genre will have at least something in common with another. Their grinding guitars, flat sound, and loud and screaming vocals are all staples of hardocre punk. No they don't scream like Death metal singers, but that's not necessary for hardcore punk to be hardcore punk Kame2000 00:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I have changed the genre to Post-hardcore and Emo-punk. If you disagree, dont be afraid and discuss it here. But this is how they are categorized on the All Music Guide, and that is the way it will stay until we reach a concensus on what their genre is. Do not change it until that happens. --Reaper X 22:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Emo-punk!!!What's this? Billy Talent is post-hardcore, punk band. They aren't emo. DCman 00:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
They are not emo punk, they are punk rock as all who have been to there gigs shall know why do you think it also says this on there myspace, it would be much appriciative if people wouldnt put them as emo punk as the only thing remotely emo was the song 'nothing to lose' as it was about killing yourself at a young age and this was simply to show the children of the world no matter how you are treated in school you dont need to go to such an extent —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.1.226.96 (talk • contribs).
Any objections to BT not being emo? --Reaper X 22:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
If you look at the lyrics to alot of their songs, you'll find that it's hard to argue that they aren't at least slightly emo. That said, I feel that post hardcore punk would be a more accurate categorisation, though I don't see the necessity for the band to fall under only one category, is it not possible to reach some kind of compromise that allows for the emo-esque lyrics, the seemigly punk look, and the hardcore flat guitar sounds in many of their songs? Plebmonk 00:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] red flag
please note that the song is not a single
Yeah, its a demo going around the internet. Nobodys is gonna have the real thing till June 27
Well it is getting air play on radio stationsJacknife737 19:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Well they did play it but they took it off for a while because they weren't aloud to play it until the album comes out on June 27th of 2006... which is today... yay!!!
When it is officially released as a single EP and promoted by the record company, it is then considered a single. It does not matter if the radio stations get their hands on an free mp3 given out by a band. Until Warner presses Red Flag onto a CD, it is NOT a single. --Reaper X 03:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, they are shooting a video for Red Flag, but that still doesn't automatically make it a single. You never know, the whole plan of making it one could be scraped in an instant. I know it looks damn likely its going to be the next single, but please ladies and gents, be patient, and wait until it s released. --Reaper X →T →C 20:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Yep Its a single nowKChuck27 17:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)70.65.115.113 17:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
How about erasing this section, umm this is pretty out of date now.
[edit] PEZ lawsuit
i reverted an edit that claimed that the candy company PEZ also threatened a lawsuit on the band back in the Pezz days. I'm skeptical about it, as there is a difference there, and the fact that it was poorly writtin. If 64.187.8.100 or anyone else can bring me a reliable source concerning this, I'll gladly put it in. Thanks. --Reaper X 22:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- i thought it was another band that was named Pezz that would have sued if the change wasnt made. -(chubbstar)— talk | contrib | 16:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Scandalous Travelers
I've noticed a lack in any mention of the Scandalous Travelers DVD. Please incorporate it to this page. Thank You --KChuck27 22:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)kChuck
[edit] Image:Bt3.jpg
Damnit. Okay people, can someone either put an image summary on Image:Bt3.jpg, or get a new pic of the band? We really need it, it's almost crucial to any band page, it just looks good. Thanks. --Reaper X →T →C 17:29, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, I'm taking care of it. --Reaper X →T →C 21:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- I dont know if this is stupid but why cant you just throw {{promophoto}} in there and be done with it? -(chubbstar)— talk | contrib | 16:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
I guess that works, I wasn't aware you could do that (I'm not very knowledgeable on licences and stuff). Thanks (chubbstar). --Reaper X →T →C 16:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Jkelly had replaced Image:bt3.jpg with Image:BT10.jpg. However, I have reverted it because the latter only shows Benjamin Kowalewicz, the lead singer. The former illustrates the whole band, making it more appropriate. The band should not circulate around the lead singer. However, Image:BT10.jpg is excellent for Benjamin Kowalewicz's page. --Reaper X 17:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with Reaper X on this issue Fyver528 16:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay, some anonymous user keeps replacing the infobox image with Image:BT Garden.jpg. It should not be replaced because 1, It has an unknown copyright status, and 2, we have a good alternative, Image:Bt3.jpg, where the author has granted permission for this image to be used in Wikipedia, and 3, The image will just be removed again by bots. Unless copyright status is given to it, leave it out. --Reaper X 18:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Awards
I trimmed down the awards section, it seemed to be taking up too much space. Instead I modeled it like the Alexisonfire Awards section, and removed most nominations. --Reaper X 18:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Third Single from II?
Can anyone confirm the next single from BT II? Everytime I check back it goes from This Suffering to Fallen Leaves and such. Until it can be sourced, I don't see a use in putting it on the page.--R-Tiztik 16:14, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
