Talk:Underoath/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Because it does. Use message boards to discuss suckness of one album over another, and label the band with random funny genres.

Iceness 11:30, 29 September 2006 (GMT)


Contents

Random Stuff Which Needs To Be Trimmed

lol hey, you guys, i'm not sure if the band really began eating poo in 2004, but you're right in that they definitly did something wrong, because TOCS and DTGL are shit compared to AOD and COP. im not going to change it lol. but you should put up that they used to be metalcore.


What happened at the Warped Tour 2006?

Does anyone know what was exactly said about Underoath from Fat Mike of NOFX? Was it the constant harrassment?

There was no harrassment. http://www.punknews.org/printstory/18930 read that. XdiabolicalX 14:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

If you notice in the screamo definition, it say's they're mislabelled as screamo. I think my edit was correct. Kertrats 12:24, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Melodic Death-Metal? What? It sounds more like Grindcore to me, and Melodic Death-Metal was more of a European genre used to describe a variety of other acts that are dubbed to be progressive as well, like Opeth. -Stangmar


Acts of Depression/Cries of the Past = Grindcore/Deathcore and maybe Melodic Death Metal

The Changing of Times = I really don't know. I have the album and there are some songs that sound pretty Death Metal, and some just plain Screamo. Screamo/Death Metal lol

TOCS/Define the Great Linfe = definately post hardcore Please cite which underoath your are defining when... defining....

Old (AoD,Cries of the Past) Underoath is much better than new underoath.


I agree with Stangmar. Underoath is not melodic death metal (read the article if you're confused about what it is). Melodic death metal, and death metal in general, are considered highly technical styles of music that usually have lyrics dealing with... well, death. Underoath is what I would call Christian post-hardcore, rather emo metalcore, or maybe emocore if you consider it a genre. And also, Opeth is probably not the best example of melodic death metal, or Gothenburg sound. Try In Flames or The Black Dahlia Murder. -unrealshadow13

Grindcore? AHAHAHAHA! I laughed so hard when i saw that, anyone with half a mind of metal, punk and rock can tell you this is not grindcore. What next, Green Day is a hardcore punk band? Someone needs to check up on their definition of grindcore. If you want grindcore listen to Napalm Death's Scum or any Anal Cunt,. But Underoath, heck no. I put it under metalcore, I am a bit relucant against post-hardcore since post-hardcore is somehwat political and less metal-driven. Melodic death metal, i say no also. Opeth IS not a melodeath band, its a progressive band, quite a difference from melodeath. As for the Gothenburg sound, the Black Dahlia Murder would not be my pick, it would the big three of melodeath: In Flames, Dark Tranquility, and At the Gates. The Black Dahlia Murder is close but those are better choices. ugh, ill probably have some Children of Bodom fan running in here complaining asap that they were not mentioned. and some people seem to froget about the christian roots of Underoath, of course it was removed (it would make them look down upon) but it is an important part whether it is liked or not. As I Lay Dying and Norma Jean sport it, come on Underoath fans you should too whether you are against it. I am not expert on the band, so I do not believe I shold write. hmmmm... emocore? some people are just pulling genres from their asses now. if emocore exists then progcore does, you heard it first from me! don't forget it!!! panasonicyouth99 04:18 April 19 (GMT)

OMG! i checked google as a joke and found progcore... LOL! panasonicyouth99 04:20 April 19 (GMT)

Underoath is not..

Post-hardcore. No. User:GoRenGo Yes

Underoath is not screamo

True story. They are like post-hardcore.

Ehhm, I wouldn't neccesarily say that they're post-hardcore, rather, but since the "post" has been rather explosive, I'd say it's more of a second wave if anything. -Stangmar CHANGE THE CRISH DUDLEY LINK (LEADS TO WASHED OUT B_BALL PLAYER)

Personally, I think there Screamo, on their official Purevolume page they think there screamo,

They are totally screamo, and the best screamo band in music today..But to be fair it totally depends on your definition of the genre "screamo".

I like to think of them as Screamo/Hardcore thats at least arcording to PureVolume. What does Underoath think they are you tell me? Tribbey 23:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

They're "Screamo" in the new definiton, but by the actual genre no they're not.MC John

Yeah man, Screamo isn't just modern emo with screams, it's a really raw style of hardcore, check out bands like Orchid, Joshua Fit For Battle & Honeywell for what screamo is. XdiabolicalX

I still wouldn't say they're screamo

change of external links

I'm proposing that we change the lyrics link from http://www.spiritsounds.net/underoath-lyrics.html to http://www.christian-lyrics.net/artist/underoath because the url doesn't actually show any lyrics from their albums. would anyone object to this change? (Jdingman 16:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC))

I've cleaned up the article and added some additional information (i.e. album covers). The history section's been condensed into one section with some additional information. Some extra links have also been added. I've also noted that the band's grindcore, though there's some debate as to whether they're melodic death metal or not. This is to avoid any unneccesary conflicts. Wlmaltby3 06:21, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Somebody trashed the page and labeled them as "emo-suck" at the top and "queer-core" at the beginning of history. The powers that be might want to fix that, as I am not exactly sure what it should be changed back to. There might be more than that, I'm not sure.

Please whoever keeps putting that http://caliband.com link I ask you not to do so in future as it is only a portal and not actually a fansite like the title claims.

Member

It says Scott Nunn was an ex member Where's the proof of that? I read somewhere in an interview that it was Aaron and no one else on drums That he was a little red headed kid that played drums for a church And that he was a jazz drummer. Now this article is saying Scott Nunn was the original drummer.


Not sounding like Dallas

"An interesting fact about the record is that Chamberlain noted that the vocals will sound less like Dallas Taylor-imitating vocals and more like the vocals of his old band, This Runs Through. The band hopes to put out the album some time during July of 2006." Where did somebody find this, I'm just curious.. It is true? Bannabop 21:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)Bannabop

yes...that is true. Check out the news section on thier official website. They have also been posting video updates every so often to update fans on the progress of the recording. --UnAWARE 02:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Genre of the new album?

In "Define the Great Line" album, their music has changed abit, and also the vocals of Spencer (the screamer), he screams deep now, in addition with his high note. So what do you all reckon is the genre of the new album?

I'd classify it as metalcore. AugustWinterman 11:58, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
You guys. Do know there is something could hardcore. There hardcore. Tribbey 23:15, ::27 May 2006 (UTC)
I classify it as hardcore/post-hardcore/metal
That's a ridiculous amount of genre's. I think post-hardcore is more fitting. -Myxomatosis 06:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Other Vocalists

Is there some proof for the vocalists Kyle Kirtz and Casey Cook? I've been an Underoath fan since the Cries of The Past days and I don't ever remember hearing of those two vocalists. AugustWinterman 12:02, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

So have I, and I don't remember them either. Neither does Google (search for "Kyle Kirtz" or "Kyle Kurtz" + Underoath). I've been watching this page for a while, and it looks like a lot of people out there have just been adding themselves to the list of band members. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 17:40, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

New Music Stolen

I heard recently on the radio that while Underoath was in studio, working on new music, that someone stole copies of their unfinished tracks and distributed them on the internet via file sharing program(s). The radio station was RadioU (Columbus, Ohio - Santa Maria / Loanpoke(sp?), California, a station that regularaly plays the newest in Christain Rock music. Would this be a worthy addition to the Underoath page? Bishobosh 01:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

This is true, and should be added. You can find these files on the internet. The band mentions this on their website and state they're jsut demos. They had listening parties at every Hot Topic and they previewed the entire album, but I didn't go(because Hot TOpic is gay) so I didn't get to hear if the files were the actual thing or not.

X Worship 2006

One may want to add to this article the fact that this band has a song on this compilation cd. -EdGl 00:58, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

How Silly

"MelodicDeathGrindCoremoxxxxx" AHHHHH! You people with your stupid genres! Who cares! Underoath is just a good band... why make it any more complicated than that. You try to make eachother sound stupid by topping off what someone else says... Hey, wait. That's kinda what I'm doing. But hey, what the heck.

Wow.


Thank you. Someone has some sense on this page. Tribbey 23:21, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Christian?

Is this band Christian? It's listed under Christian bands, but it doesn't say that it's a Christian band in the actual article...

The Wretched

If you have seen them live, they tend to mention they "Do everything they do for Jesus Christ"

yes, but the argument could be made that only individuals can make the decision to be a follower of jesus. music itself or a non-living entity such as a band cannot be "christian." music in and of itself is lifeless and cannot be considered christian.

They are definitely a Christian band, and I was wondering why it didn't mention that in the article. If you want to question that, read these lyrics first: [link to copyvio website removed] MikeNM 02:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

the question is not whether or not the individual members are christians. this is true and accepted. it is whether or not a non living, non human entity such as a band can adopt the adjective christian. would you call a rose christian or a flock of birds christian birds? the term cant be applied to a non living, non human entity. posted by 71.196.93.227

What you said doesn't make a lick of sense but they are are christian band. -Myxomatosis 19:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

If we follow what you are saying, 71.196.93.227, then we cannot call a Church Christian either. posted by: 24.80.107.198

of course it doesn't make sense. it is absurd to think that a flock of birds can be called christian birds, because the use of the adjective christian is not applicable to anything but an individual human. a band is by definition, in and of itself, a non living noun. there is no such thing as a christian stone or a christian sandwich or a christian basketball team. posted by: 72.144.196.138

You guys are thinking too hard on this. please do not remove the Christian from the artcle. If needed we can just block your IP's from editing this article. This is ridiculous. -Myxomatosis 06:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Your opinion about the term "Christian Band" is arbitrary and cannot be universally accepted and validated as truth, thereby comprimising the purity of wikipedia as a reliable source. i suggest you leave your personal opinions aside and allow the most relevant information to stand. if you would like to add a section to the article about the members' personal christianity, lyrical content or behavior at concerts, i invite you to do so. however, because of the dispute over the polemic use of the adjective "christian" in their description, it should stand alone as "underoath is a (post hardcore, rock,whatever...) band," leaving the christian input for elsewhere in the article. -Joelibyan

It's not a personal opinion at all. you read any article or interview of the band and they are always stating that they are christian. You guys are missing the point it has nothing to do with the purity of wikipedia. it's a fact. -Myxomatosis 20:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

"I feel like I want people to know we're a Christian band," vocalist SPENCER CHAMBERLAIN says of UNDEROATH'S collective devotion. "But at the same time I don't like tacking God or the fact that we're Christian onto something to sell more records. I don't want just to be marketed as a Christian band because I think we go beyond that. Tags can be limiting." I hope this quote from definethegreatline.com under the biography category answers everyones question. The entire biography section of this site has valuable information on this debate. If they call themselves a Christian band, then they are. Period.

And to those people who called a band a non-living noun, you are incorrect. the dictionary.com definition of a band states that it is a "group of musicians who perform as an ensemble." 'Christian' as an adjective is perfectly appropriate to use in this case.


I know its ironic UnderOath was on Loveline, but if you listen to the transcript it shows how uncomfortable they are and the band states they are christian, they sing about christian happenings in their life, and what exactly Define The Great Line is about. I suggest all you people listen to the words that came straight out of their mouths. Click on the link.[1]

On their Myspace page, they're not listed as a Christian band. When I'm asked about them I say they're a hardcore band from the U.S. The religion thing doesn't have a lot to do with it, it's not bleedingly obvious like dc Talk or Matisyahu. Besides, religion can alienate potential fans, as one guy put it, so I say it stays as "post-hardcore/metalcore" and Christianity stays out. Who's with me? Love, Valkyrie Missile

when you pop in any of their cds, if you look at the genre they originally come under.. it says Religious & Gospel. now i dont think they are a worship band or anything, but its important to note and recognize that their musical content is strongly related to Christianity.. it doesnt matter if it turns some fans off, the point is; they are a Christian band and thats fact. people come to wiki to know the basics of certain topics, not to know what you call the band when you are asked what genre they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User: 24.84.82.208| 24.84.82.208]] ([[User talk: 24.84.82.208|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ 24.84.82.208|contribs]])

24.84.82.208, it's mentioned in the SECOND FREAKING SENTENCE!!!! I'm pretty sure you're the only one who really cares enough to change the opening sentence (read from the other REGISTERED users on the talk page); why can't you let us live with the compromise? If you change it again, your IP will be blocked. And by the way, yes, everyone knows that they are a band of Christians, but, outside of "Some Will Seek Forgiveness, Others Escape," you can't really tell from their music that they are Christian. There is a pretty big difference there. Leave it the way it is. Roofi's Publicist 02:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

first off, you dont block someone for making changes with well backed up reasons. second off, i am probably the only that cares. and lastly, i think you need to look into the lyrical content. also... try not freaking out next time. wikipedia is open to the public for a reason.

Ok, I overreacted; I apologize. I was more angry with the fact that you bypassed the talk page and brazenly decided for all of us what the band would be classified, rather than what you actually classified them as (I could make a good argument for either way). Just remember run stuff by the community first before changing something, unless it's obviously wrong. (and on talk pages, end your message by signing with four tildes) Roofi's Publicist 03:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is open to the public for a reason: because the people who run it are too idealistic... oops, did I say that? heh... Seriously, though, I kid, but I do think Wikipedia ought to have more limits. Controversies like this are why. 'Nuff said. --Jaysweet 03:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Side Projects

how about making a section with the side projects and previous projects examples: this runs through the almost (chris' side project)

aaron is the almost, not chris

Tampa/Ocala discussion

Origin: Ocala, Fl Current base of operations: Tampa, Fl Most of the original members were from the Ocala area and played a majority of their first shows there, but through the passage of time and the arrival of new members, the majority of the members live in Tampa and say they're from Tampa at concerts and on various websites (myspace, purevolume...) please act accordingly and leave the edits alone. -Joelibyan

I am and others are basing the edits on what we know. We aren't out of line by any means or not "acting accordingly". You have no authority over anyone. This is a community based site. Perhaps next time you can explain your critical changes so people can understand. Love, -Myxomatosis 08:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

dude, not again... thats exactly what i was doing by posting here... "explaining my critical changes." i used the phrase act accordingly, because it is the undeniable truth and needs to be left alone. you're right, i have no authority over what anyone wants to falsely put on the page. i can, however, edit the page with the correct information and request that the information stay there by explaining myself and asking people to respect that, aka "act accordingly." btw, if i see incorrect information and i myself have the correct information, have i not authority and a responsibilty to change it? just a thought. -Joelibyan


Capitalization

I have seen the band's name written differently, like underOATH and the like. How 'bout we clear that up? Bandgeek100 16:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not spelled that way on their releases at all. On musicbrainz it's also not capitolized. So I think it's already been cleared up. -Myxomatosis 07:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

on changing of times the font appears that way, and also on their myspace it is presented as underOATH. i think its merely an artistic decision, just like the scandanavian looking O (with the line through it). it could also be a subtle way of insinuating that the name is pronounced underOATH, with the emphasis on the oath, as opposed to UNderoath, as some people pronounce it. all of that said, the name of the band is underoath, or more properly, Underoath. any other representation is an artistic decision that could be in the hands of the band or the hands of the people in charge of design and marketing. -Joelibyan

Most ridiculous article ever

This article is so messy, full of half truths written by misinformed people who take rumor as fact (band members still in high school? during the early days, aaron was homeschooled, octavio was married and corey was in his 20's). Not to mention, non pertinent information takes a forefront (see: really long intro sentence) while other blatant facts (bands orgin: ocala) is removed constantly and changed to tampa... i tried for awhile to keep this page factual, but i gave up long ago. good luck.

      I added the high school part based on something Aaron said in an interview on the Chasing Safety special edition DVD. If somebody has better info on that, then please share it. Roofi's Publicist 19:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

NOFX rumor

the incident of Underoath leaving the Warped Tour is not really understood. the rumors about Fat Mike from NOFX is most likely due to a jorunal entry on the band's site. i dont really think he really had anything to do with their leaving, but i think of a mention of it should be in the article. i believe it should be mentioned in this article to help people understand the reason for the speculation.

Duck picture?

i suppose we can chalk this one up to vandalism. who put a duck picture on here for the band? i would like it changed. i would do so myself, but i dont fully understand the free domain issues for pictures on wikipedia.


it's not vandalism. the nature shot is their new album cover

what? their newest album is define the great line (which i bought), and it doesnt have a duck anywhere in the album case.

the one after that


You're an idiot. That is not an album cover.

It's from Define The Great Duck. Moron.

Is that the new ep? I think they have it on limewire

they do I found it on there to


Just because you don't want it to exist doesn't mean it won't

hey man I like underoath I have every album but I like the duck up there its funny

Cleaning up a little

A few things: first, is there any way we can get a newer picture of the band? The photo we've got now is still from Chasing Safety and the band's changed a bit in the last two years. Second, the paragraph on Underoath doing the Take Action tour is good, but the spot that it's in now sort of disrupts the flow of the article, I think. I can't think of another place to put it, off-hand, but I think the article would be better if we moved it. And lastly, do we really need the part on Fat Mike from NOFX? There doesn't seem to be any truth to the rumor that he caused Underoath to leave Warped Tour, and rumors without any truth to them don't really have a place in an encyclopedia. Roofi's Publicist 01:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

For the band picture, how about using the picture in the band's info page on their website? (http://underoath777.com/images/band.jpg) Ender1490 03:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


For the band picture, how about the duck
I went with Ender1490's idea, though I am curious to see what this duck looks like. Roofi's Publicist 15:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Added {unreferenced} tag

Hey guys, seeing as how there seems to be a little controversy over what happened on the Warp tower, do you think some of you could dig up some articles from MTV news or something and put in some citations? I know articles about bands usually aren't well cited anyway, but since it seems like there's some disagreement, maybe being more rigorous is a good idea here... --Jaysweet 19:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Warped Tour: July 13th

Underoath was finishing up an awesome set at warped tour in Marysville, CA after playing their final song the Lead Screamer (sorry i forgot his name) said thanks for staying around with us (they were one of the last bands on the main stage that day) then went on to say please go check out NOFX they are playing next on the stage right next to us so go check them out. Now Obviously Underoath and NOFX bring two very different crowd to Warped Tour the front man for NOFX (sorry i can't remember his name) then started saying there goes all the underoath crowd and basically starts making fun of the people leaving and underoath saying oh its the christian crowd we don't want them anyways and oh i like underoath... with their skinnyness and what not, then they proceded to make fun of another band Aiden but i didn't really listen after that. So ya thats what happened i was there i gotta ticket, but i don't think Underoath would leave the tour because of that?


Please vote on what genre these guys are

Myxomatosis and 74.132.81.159 -- the revert war over the "Metalcore" tag is absolutely pointless. You two have been doing it infrequently enough that you have not yet broken the Three-Revert Rule, but you certainly aren't making the page better. How about if we put Metalcore in flashing text? What you two are doing is just a more labor intensive way of accomplishing the same thing...  :p

Let's please have a vote on whether the intro should label Underoath as Metalcore or not. I have no opinion as I've never heard this band before, but I hate revert wars. :) Let's vote! --Jaysweet 14:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Underoath is not metalcore, though they used to be. They're more Screamo/Post-Hardcore (take your pick). Ender1490 02:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Their website has a blurb about "redefined hardcore or screamo or whatever you want to call it", so that seems reasonable.
Proposed compromise: Take "metalcore" out of the intro, but feature it more prominently in the history of the band section, that they used to be more metalcore. Can we please hear from the IP address that continually adds the "metalcore" description to see if he/she is agreeable to this compromise? --Jaysweet 15:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I apologize for my stupidity. I didn't even realize at the time how annoying it was. Obviously I vote them to be considered as a Metalcore genre, but even if disagreed with I won't say anything more.
(P.S. you kids are making me feel really old... "Post-hardcore" is something I'd heard before, but "screamo" and "metalcore" are totally new terms for me. I'm only 27 and you're making me feel like a damn geezer!!! And I'm in a frikkin' band too, I shouldn't be this uncool already...) --Jaysweet 15:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I actually think "post-hardcore/metalcore" accurately describes Underoath, especially their new material. On They're Only Chasing Safety, they were definitely "screamo" or "post-hardcore," whatever; they sang almost as much, if not as much, as they screamed. But Define the Great Line is definitely harder -- Spencer screams a lot more and in spots, they sound a lot like Norma Jean, which I think we can all agree is a metalcore band. I think the intro sentence should stay the same. Roofi's Publicist 02:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
No, I think Underoath is definitely Post-Hardcore/Screamo (whichever). The only reason their new album sound metalcore, is because Underoath decided to pay tribute to their metalcore roots, and also, Spencer didn't want people thinking he was trying to be the new Dallas. Ender1490 20:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I personally think it's ridiculous, that we have all these "core" genres. It's out of control and I think we should just stick with post-hardcore. Keep it simple please. -Myxomatosis 09:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
They're not screamo, go listen to a screamo band like Orchid or Saetia, Underoath sounds nothing like them. Post-Hardcore/Metalcore is the best thing to have it as because there is obviously metalcore parts of the new album, the first song sounds like Every Time I Die. What's the big deal anyway, it's not like people are trying to call them thrash or anything. XdiabolicalX 23:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not really sure how to describe them. Calling Underoath post-hardcore seems to general and not specific enough. Their newest album has metalcore roots similar to the Dallas-era and I, personally, figure future albums will probably continue having metalcore roots so I say Metalcore should at least be included. --Tsurayu 23:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


i vote for the current and highly accurate "emo/screamo" --Joelibyan
"Highly accurate"? Nice try, buddy. Their music doesn't even resemble emo. Trust me, ive heard emo, and that's not UnderOATH. I go for Post-hardcore.
i guess sarcasm is hard to get across through typing without vocal intonation

Should the rumors stay for information?

I've noticed someone has taken off the information concerning them leaving Warped Tour and the rumors of controversy with Fat Mike of NOFX, should that stay as information regarding what was going on even if it may be nothing more than rumor? --Tsurayu 22:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Whoever is working on this article is doing an excellent job

I'm very impressed. I do keep my eye out for vandals and have reverted a few times. Mattisse(talk) 00:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I work on this article a lot, so this could well be a thank you. So thank you! Hehehe. Love, Valkyrie Missile.

Yeah. I've reverted three times today. This is ridiculous. Mack. 04:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

"Christian Post-Hardcore/Metalcore" or Just "Post-Hardcore/Metalcore"?

Vote on which of the above to use in the opening sentence to describe the band and then keep it that way. I'm getting tired of this little revert war that's erupted over whether or not to mention Underoath's faith in the opening sentence. I'd vote to include "Christian" in the opening sentence, but I don't really care. Just as long as we get a consensus...and stick to it. Roofi's Publicist 16:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Not include because you wouldn't put Buddhist or Atheist in the first line for any other bands. XdiabolicalX 17:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Include You would if the band sang about Buddhisim in the vast majority of the songs.
  • 'Not include because they've said they don't want to be marketed as a Christian band. And it's not their selling point, like Creed or whatever. Valkyrie Missile
  • In reply to the 3rd comment, Underoath haven't specifically sang about Christianity since the second album at the latest, their later stuff may still be spiriual but you can't say it's Christian. XdiabolicalX 17:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Right so I actually found a link which explains it but I don't think it'll stop, this guy who keeps adding it is on some sort of crusade lol. XdiabolicalX 14:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok, so I've been silently watching this little edit war mainly because I wasn't in the mood to become passionately attached to it, but now I think something should be said. First off, there's a quote ON THE ARTICLE from Underoath's website with Spencer saying that Underoath doesn't want to be labled as a Christian band. Now I know just because he says that, it doesnt necissarily make it true (I mean anyone can say an orange is purple, doesn't mean its true).
At the moment, it seems to me, that the only way to say it would be something along the lines of that the members are christian and the music reflects it, but they prefer not to be labled that title. Also somewhere on this massive talk page, it mentions that Define the Great Line is about their faith, it may be in part, but most of it is about Spencer's struggle with drug and alchol abuse (as told in the October issue of Alternative Press). -Lindsey8417 10:06, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Break-Up?????

Did anyone else see that freaky thing that some anon wrote about Spencer drowning in the bath?? It was fucked up! Valkyrie Missile

Extensive discussion of "Christian" tag in the intro does not belong there

Another unfortunate side-effect of the contention over how to label this band is the fact the intro is now polluted by a very long discussion of how the band wants to be labelled. This is waaaay too detailed for the intro and doesn't belong there, it should be in a later section that discusses the issue in detail (and y'all can make your arguments there). --Jaysweet 15:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Template

Just to let you guys know, I created a template for the band. It doesn't seem perfect to me yet, so if anybody wants to add anything to it before it gets put on their page, feel free. Roofi's Publicist 02:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


Archive

This has got rather large does anyone know how to archive the talk pages correctly? XdiabolicalX 14:54, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

WTH?

Dude, who put "Hardcore Punk", "Death metal", and "Shifty Disco" in the genres. That's stupid, the only thing that is closest is Hardcore Punk, because they are Post-hardcore. I have deleted this vandalism.

no longer metalcore

Without Dallas Taylor, this band is not metalcore. Metalcore needs to be taken out of the genres.

I must state that because of wikipedia, in all it's glory, must state every genre overall their career. Actually, how about putting:

Post-hardcore (New material)

Metalcore (Old material)

I think it would be fitting.