Talk:Thrash metal/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Thrash metal. 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. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Chronology
Some of the problems with the chronology can possibly be cleaned up by changing to: 80's, 90's, 2000's, or early 80's, late 80's, 90's, 2000's...
any thought about that? i can start consolidating those sections if people agree J M B (talk) 09:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why it needs it, though I suppose the mid to late 80's could be combined. To be honest, I think most of the late 80s section needs to go - it's not about thrash, it's just a listing of everyone's favorite albums, which isn't really what this article should be. I can see the reasons for keeping 1986 in there though. Random name (talk) 22:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
some i guess but bands like pantera and seputura moved away from thrash and created their own sort of new style —Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.61.154.237 (talk) 08:04, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Recent popularity (2000s)
In this section, some of the new bands cited are not even classified as trash in their respective Wiki article. Should these be axed ? I already removed those that weren't in the referenced paper. zubrowka74 14:56, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- They should only be there if a reliable source indicates they are thrash metal. If the article indicates that they are what their wikipedia article says doesnt really matter. But if there is no evidence they should go like the rest. Good job.--SabreBD (talk) 15:01, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- Or perhaps the other way around : Trash should be added to their wiki articles using the same source :) zubrowka74 15:06, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ok that's enough. I would remove most albums cited in the second paragraph to keep only the most notable bands. I mean, we don't have to list every single resurging thrash artist out there. Death Angel, Onslaught, Artillery, Heathen, heck I'd even remove Voïvod. zubrowka74 17:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- I agree we just need a few examples.--SabreBD (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- Ok that's enough. I would remove most albums cited in the second paragraph to keep only the most notable bands. I mean, we don't have to list every single resurging thrash artist out there. Death Angel, Onslaught, Artillery, Heathen, heck I'd even remove Voïvod. zubrowka74 17:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- Or perhaps the other way around : Trash should be added to their wiki articles using the same source :) zubrowka74 15:06, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Mini-Sub-genre's of Thrash
There have been tons of bands that play Thrash, but have a distinct style that's different from pure thrash. I was going to add a section detailing them and give examples of bands and all that and how they're different from the pure thrash. These would be melodic thrash metal, death/thrash, blackened thrash metal, technical thrash metal and brutal thrash. If no one has a problem with this, I'll make the section on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.178.152.137 (talk) 22:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Without cites, this section is pretty much just your opinion, and is certainly OR. Can you find any cites? Articles on bands, anything? Random name (talk) 14:41, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Didn't the term thrash
Didn't the term "thrash" originally refer to a faster style of punk music and NOT heavy metal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.209.185 (talk) 22:38, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Regional Scenes
Do we need all this trivial information ? Nothing is referenced, and most do not have their own article. As I see it, only the Bay Area and Teutonic scenes are noteworthy. Everything else should go in other scenes. I mean, I heard thrash is *really* the thing going on in Turkmenistan right now. zubrowka74 17:55, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Indeed, I find that the Regional Scenes section is highly bloated. I edited the part on Spanish Thrash Metal a while back so that it was not such an eyesore, but to be honest I do not see the need to keep that or some of the other entries there. PiT (The Physicist) (talk) 05:53, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- Finally did it. I kept "East Coast" with hopes that someone will reference it and I removed Australian thrash metal. Even though they have an article because the only source is an obscure autralian website. zubrowka74 20:42, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Stone Cold Crazy should be removed
That song isn't even Metal let alone thrash, as such first thrash bands were raven and venom, they made music that was closest to thrash and they aren't even considered thrash.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.84.80 (talk) 13:23, 29 July 2011 (UTC)