Talk:Agalloch

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Themes[edit]

The current section reads like a blurb that you would read on the cover of an album. It's not encyclopedic in any sense. Can somebody please work with the sources and improve the text? Sentences like, "Don Anderson's proficiency with the language puts the band in a prime position to be able to put out stellar material from the lyrical aspect," are incompatible with an encyclopedia. "The band does not stop here though, their later work shows how adaptive they are with literary works" . . . really? Seriously? Is this a review of an album or something? This is strictly opinion. The entire section is written in this style. Raoulduke25 (talk) 15:55, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References and sources[edit]

I've removed the message from the top of the article saying that this article doesn't cite any sources or references. The article now cites six different sources, due to edits made recently. AutumnStorms (talk) 02:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-traditional Instruments[edit]

Hi, I've added an additional piece of information to the "Influences" section, as this section mentions that Agalloch uses some non-traditional instruments but does not give an example of a non-traditional instrument that they do use. I have referenced my addition to an interview in which this piece of information can be found. AutumnStorms —Preceding comment was added at 07:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Allagoch" albums?[edit]

It bothers me that when I try to click through the albums, they are under the name of "Allagoch", and that this has never been changed. I'm not good enough with computers to know how to change it. I would, but someone that knows more is going to have to field this one.

"Genre?"[edit]

Obviously there's alot of debate on the genre, but I think it's pretty much been established that as far as a main sound goes, agalloch are folk/doom metal. I don't and never will consider dark metal a genre, regardless of what any of the band members think. Taking a look at the agalloch last.fm page (www.last.fm/music/agalloch), you can see that most fan's agree. PEiP 06:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Folk metal is correct, but it has no doom sound in it whatsoever. It is DEATH metal. Any sentient intelligent being could tell doom from death metal. Therefore, Folk & Death. And that thing, "dark metal" is simply ridiculous and pathetic. Someone correct it, thank you. Anonymous 21:09, March 2008 (GMT+2) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.98.144.156 (talk) 20:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well you are wrong then, please get your facts straight and understand genres better, they are folk and black (not death at all) with doom (doom can be mixed) and post-metal elements. Although theres many problems with their genre (especially dark metal) so it's best to leave that alone or a big argument will ensue. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ kaiden 20:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Any assertion of genre must be backed by reliable sources if there is debate. Any claims made by individual users here is original research. = ∫tc 5th Eye 20:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of coarse but where could these sources be? I'll have a go for sources to see if the genres can even be sourced, if not, then we have a problem. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ kaiden 02:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have finished sourcing the genres but only one is hard to reference and that is their post-metal/post-rock elements. Well, not really hard to reference but differencing the two. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ kaiden 08:36, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CircafuciX, I noticed you added all those genre entries back into the article after I removed them. In the first place, I do not believe that we need any references in the infobox when references are already provided for the band's genre in the main article itself. Secondly, you've duplicated not one but two sources that I've already provided as references. You're tagging the band with seven genres which I think is a tad bit much. You've used theendrecords.com as a source for the genres of dark metal and ambient. I'm not sure if a promotional plug by a record label would qualify as a reliable source but be that as it may, there's no article page for dark metal on wikipedia and clicking on that link would take one to black metal. The entry on theendrecords.com describes the band as bridging the gap between gothic doom, black metal, neo-folk, post rock, and industrial/ambient soundscapes. That does not strikes me as a description of the band as an ambient or industrial artist but merely a description of the band using all those many styles of music as elements. So I think it's a bit misleading to list ambient as one of the genres the band is in. It would be like listing Korpiklaani as a traditional folk band when they are nothing of the kind - even though they do bridge the gap between heavy metal and traditional folk music just as Agalloch bridge the gap between all those different styles mentioned. I also have to question the post-metal tag since the review on popmatters does not even use the word but rather describes the band as combining black metal with "more melodic sounds like folk and post rock." I'm also hesitant on the neofolk tag since the allmusic.com entry use the qualify "touches" in reference to both neofolk and post-rock. In other words, I do not think the allmusic.com entry is actually saying that the band is neofolk or post-rock but that their music includes touches of neofolk and post-rock. I'm guessing you did not noticed it but I had actually changed the description of the band in the style section. I wrote "Agalloch performs a progressive and avant-garde style of folk metal that encompasses an eclectic range of tendencies including neofolk, post-rock, black metal and doom metal." Like all my other edits, it's supported by references. I think this is an accurate description of a band based on all the sources I've looked at. I have not actually listened to the band myself so I'm being quite neutral here. I believe offering that sentence on the band's style is more helpful than having seven genres listed in the infobox since a reader can very well come to the mistaken conclusion that the band plays ambient or neofolk in equal amount as they play folk or black metal when all sources that I've seen indicate otherwise. If you disagree with that perception I've gotten and hence the statement I wrote, then please let me know so that we can see what we can do to change it. I think the folk metal tag is probably sufficient in the infobox since that seems to be the one thing that everyone agrees with. Maybe one or two more other tags at the most. --Bardin (talk) 10:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm sorry, either I added it unknowingly, or was just trying to restore it or simply forgot to look/had a styles section, so sorry with my faulty undos lately. They do have a neofolk release, a split album with Nest but as you said everything is just elements of it after that (same type of thing with Opeth’s Damnation), and neofolk fuses industrial music with folk music and experimental touches so that’s where industrial comes in. I think post-rock is just an influence and they are actually post-metal as one of their other genres or it is an element and post-rock the influence. I’ve listened to the band only a few times but not really enough to know for sure. I fully accept your arguments though. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ kaiden 01:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, mate. I guess the split album is good enough to leave the neofolk tag in. Cheers. --Bardin (talk) 02:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about this? Let's clean up the infobox to only include genres that either meet Wikipedia's standards of reliability, whether they be cited in the infobox, or something cited in the article? With a band like this when the genre is so hard to pin down, the best thing to do is just let the sources speak for themselves.Mlillybaltimore (talk) 20:44, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pantheism?[edit]

How about some mention of Pantheism, which seems to influence a lot of their lyrics (they even have a song titled Pantheist). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.100.106.115 (talk) 01:06, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Agallochside.jpg[edit]

Image:Agallochside.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Excuse me, but could we probably get a new article band picture it is out of date. One of these perhaps? http://www.last.fm/music/Agalloch/+images/62416067 http://www.last.fm/music/Agalloch/+images/52107907 http://www.last.fm/music/Agalloch/+images/4438280 Anyway the reason, is that Chris Greene left them years ago and now the drumming duties are performed by Aesop Dekker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.87.182 (talk) 13:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agalloch: A progressive metal band?[edit]

My watchlist has brought to my attention that an anonymous user edited the Agalloch wikipedia article who was under the impression that Agalloch is a progressive metal band. This was their edit. The edit summary of user 140.253.33.121 goes like this:


There are probably going to be some people who disagree with categorizing Agalloch is a progressive metal band, thus making a counterexample of the anonymous user's prediction.

So, here's the question. Part a: Is Agalloch a progressive metal band? Part b: Should the edit of anonymous user 140.253.33.121 be reverted? Part c: Considering the fact that Agalloch's music is already categorized with five different musical genres, will that affect the outcome of the decision? Thank you.

BTC 01:37, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The references for the genres were removed a while back. FireCrystal (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I just looked through the page and they're in the "Style" section, they were removed from the infobox into this section. FireCrystal (talk) 01:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool. Thanks for your input. BTC 02:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Post rock or post metal?[edit]

An anonymous user just changed what was originally in the infobox's genre section from post rock to post-metal. I don't really know if it should be post rock, as originally placed, or if post-metal is fine as well. Understand that whatever the case, the anonymous user was editing under good faith. What are your thoughts?

BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 02:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't think either one fits, but regardless, we'd need sources. = ∫tc 5th Eye 18:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We do... it's just in the style section. Though it would be good to look for another other than allmusic. Why don't people look into the article more? FireCrystal (talk) 21:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about that but I added "ambient" to the genres and that's been removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.129.85 (talk) 01:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I removed that. A source would be appreciated to classify Agalloch as an ambient band. Sure Agalloch has a few ambient songs such as The Misshapen Steed, A Desolation Song (maybe), and maybe The Wolves of Timberline, but that doesn't make Agalloch an ambient band per se. If more of their material was ambient, then maybe it would be considered for the genre to stay on there. Also, they have some music that are easily not ambient music. That's my two cents. I'm sure you're working in good faith, though. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 01:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Metal Archives presently recognizes Agalloch (and other bands such as Alcest and Sólstafir) as post-metal. The Mantle in particular is texturous and crescendous in nature, which are signature elements for post-rock. The metal element obviously comes from black metal. Blizk2 (talk) 07:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody find a reference for Agalloch's next album[edit]

written in english? Unless you can find it in hebrew. lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.133.139 (talk) 03:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you want the information to display that is coming from the source? The mere fact that the album is planned to be released? If so, then I'm on it. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 03:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Come to think of it, I don't know if it should be mentioned at all on the article. There isn't much information on the album out there. I'll see what I can do here. BacktableSpeak to Meabout what I have done 03:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Agalloch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Agalloch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:09, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Agalloch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:40, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Extreme metal"[edit]

Whoever keeps changing agalloch to Extreme Metal must be a troll, and this topic should be locked due to that. There is a lot of argument over the distinction of their genre but extreme metal is ridiculous. Just call them a metal band. 47.225.107.81 (talk) 19:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there nothing more important to discuss than this? Since you came to the talk page, very well. Forgive me if the following passage comes off as harsh, but I will oblige you.
Firstly, we have a rule on Wikipedia to not tinker with genres aimlessly; and that rule also covers doing so on a major scale (bear in mind, I am not formally accusing you of doing the latter, although you have clearly done the former on this page). Therefore, my reversion of your edit, linked here, is, from the perspective of the genre changing, justified based on the Genre Warrior rule that I just linked. It is not necessarily because I purely and adamantly believe Agalloch are "extreme metal" (although, for reasons I will explain below, I regard it as a factual assessment); but my edits are motivated by a need to give Wikipedia and its articles stability and consistency. Part of that is to revert encroachments against such.
Secondly, "extreme metal" is not even a genre. It is an umbrella term, a generalized descriptor, of heavier genres and movements within metal music, as well as the bands who musically and stylistically adhere to such. It, just like the terms classic rock or adult contemporary music or indie music, has no defining sound and also minimal objective identity separating it from music which are not. However, unlike these three terms, extreme metal at least has schools of subgenres that objectively conform to its definition. Unlike those radio formats whose definitions are flighty and unspecific and can change depending on the DJ or commentator; extreme metal, as a label, exists to help differentiate the likes of rap metal and pop metal from, say, black metal and grindcore. It is a rhetorical access point that helps ease the reader and clarify to them toward metal subgenres.
Thirdly, let's review Agalloch's genre descriptors, as they currently stand in the infobox: "Black metal, folk metal, doom metal, post-metal". If you visit the extreme metal page, you can see its infobox includes both black metal and doom metal as subgenres, and post-metal as a "derivative form". While folk metal is not necessarily an extreme form of metal, folk black metal is, due to the touted black metal influence. Since Agalloch is demonstrated as a "black folk metal" band (among other things), it is therefore my conclusion that extreme metal is an adequate descriptor of the band, assuming there is not enough space to detail which subgenres of metal are apparent. As well, just because Agalloch particularly has ambient and cavernous pieces such as "The Misshapen Steed", and strongly features acoustic guitar, does not negate the general rule that they are an extreme metal band. (There are even people who would make debates about whether Agalloch is black metal and folk metal band, or are black/folk metal. To which, I say, there is no serious difference.)
Fourthly, by dying on the hill of "Agalloch is NOT extreme metal" and choosing to double down; not only is such a stance extremely petty and frivolous, but also implies that Wikipedia should arbitrarily rate the "heaviness" of each and every band, metal or otherwise, covered here. Doing such a thing would overwhelmingly go against Wikipedia's ethos, and specifically our guidelines regarding original research, neutrality and objectivity, and perhaps even synthesis. There is no clear line that separates "extreme" metal from "not extreme" metal, similar to how there is no clear line that separates "metal music" from "rock music". There is no need, in any situation, to act as if there are such lines.
As well, one of your recent edit summaries made the statement, "If you want to go into detail on the genres they pull from add it in a separate sentence". The article already has an entire(!) section(!) doing exactly(!) that(!), and it is four paragraphs long. It is the "Style" section, which features nine citations and details elements that are much deeper and more interesting than just the genre labels. With you having said what I quoted, you are implying about yourself, falsely or otherwise, that you either completely missed or intentionally ignored the existence of that entire section (the Style section isn't hidden, that's for sure), and you did effectively ignore the purpose of the section. Such a thing is very characteristic of Genre Warriors, who seem to only fixate on infoboxes, intros, and Short Description text. And the Short Description is just that: another umbrella phrase meant to be superficially descriptive so as to make way for the article's content. No need to look too much into the Short Description, nor even make it a complete sentence.
I hate to come off as someone who is biting a newcomer, but I hope you understand that my apprehension is based not just on the dense pettiness, subjective hair-splitting, and proud ignorance of your inquiry, #47; but is also based on you falsely referring to extreme metal as a genre, and shirking good faith by saying that you are being reverted by someone who "must be a troll".
When you removed "extreme" from the extreme metal link in the article intro, you ended up linking to the metal article, which details the material (as in "precious metals" ) and not the music. Even if you did have your way and "extreme" was removed from Agalloch's genre description for good, there would likely be people coming about who would take arms at the implication to them that Agalloch is a heavy metal band; they, too, would not bother reading too deeply into the article, if at all. And, even casting aside our guidelines for a minute, if Wikipedia allowed edits such as yours to persist and be the rule on our websites; the genre tinkering would, by this approach, never end. Now, please excuse me while I go do something more productive than this.
Mungo Kitsch (talk) 02:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems I had a huge misunderstanding of the definition of extreme metal, and I have to agree with you that is the best descriptor. My apologies. 47.225.107.81 (talk) 08:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your response, and accept your apology and repentance. Feel free to add constructively to Wikipedia whenever and as frequently as you so choose. You and I have a clean slate now. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 06:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Agalloch&oldid=1204578601"