Talk:List of doom metal bands

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

Untitled[edit]

Explaining 9/11 revert... Nightwish is symphonic power metal, not doom metal by a long shot.--Jsorens 19:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


"16" links nowhere (band-related), and I wasn't able to find what was supposed to be there. --Presto K. 02:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basically all the redlinks and unrelated bluelinks should be removed, to keep this list verifiable. This has been done to most other metal band lists already. Feel free to clean the article up, if you want to. Prolog 03:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm on to it. I'll prolly do it over the next couple of days, as I'm a little busy right now and can't do it all in one hit-K37 07:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


New here to Wikipedia , and I was checking out the doom bands and I see The Sword listed. They are stoner rock.User:drtuttle — drtuttle (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Nope socky, per established discussion, they are doom. And you claim to be new, yet have an edit from the 22nd of Dec, and all your edits are in The Swords articles or relate to The Sword in some way.The Kinslayer 14:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed bands[edit]

I've removed bands with no articles, i.e. red links. No point listing a band if the encyclopaedia has no information on them; it's equivalent to promotion. --Dane ~nya 03:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

This article needs major cleanup. A lot of the entries link to entries that aren't bands but rather words the bands get their names from. I've been working on fixing this by adding "xxx (band)" to many of the links, however I don't know if the actual articles (if they exist) point to "xxx (doom metal band)" or something similar. I've only looked at A-J and T on (approximately), and may not have been very thorough anyway. = ∫ tc 5th Eye 00:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up most of these - also removing non-doom bands Spearhead 21:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amorphis[edit]

Amorphis are not doom metal and never was. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.114.144.82 (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Tales from the Thousand Lakes is doom.--Jsorens 13:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tales from the Thousand Lakes is not doom and Amorphis have nothing to do with doom. Tales from the Thuosand Lakes is just straight melodic death metal with little doom influence. I can considered their first two albums (The Karelian Isthmus and Privilege of Evil) more Brutal death metal than doom. Amorphis have doom metal influences particulary their early works, but in fact Amorphis have nothing to do with doom.

I've added some bands[edit]

Salt of the Earth Monument of Urns

Amorphis, Novembre, Eternal Tears Of Sorrow, Theatre Of Tragedy, etc.[edit]

These bands are just NOT doom metal and never been even close to doom metal. They should be removed, because they play something else, as gothic metal for instance, but not doom. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nothingagainst (talk • contribs) 15:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC).— Nothingagainst (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Well, if you hadn't ignored the notice at the top of the list you'd have seen it clearly states that the scope of this list includes band that used to play doom metal at any point in their career. Consensus is against you on this one. Unless you generate significant support for removing them (and can come up with more compelling evidence beyond 'These aren't Doom because I said so'), I will re-insert them every time they are removed per current consensus. The Kinslayer 15:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't put bands that have no article onto the list. It's for bands with articles only, so that it complies with WP:NOT. The Kinslayer 15:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I see, I'm not the only one who objects about, for instance, Amorphis here. They never played doom metal as well as Theatre Of Tragedy and other mentioned. Amorphis was initially a death metal band and later clearly a folk metal and prog metal band. Theatre Of Tragedy also never played doom, but "beauty & the beast" gothic metal in their beginnings and later in their career moved more towards less metallic goth rock. No doom metal there, so there's no reason for them to stay in the list. Nothingagainst

You want to take this up on the various talk pages of the individual bands then. Until then, enjoy being reverted. The Kinslayer 16:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think you need first to explain here why you insist that these bands should remain on the list. Nothingagainst

Because there are sources stating them as Doom, per WP:ATT. Your turn. And you looking at both the anonymous IP and your own edit history, I'm pretty sure you are the only person thinking along these lines. The Kinslayer 08:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant source: www.doom-metal.com Check out their bandlist, none of the mentioned bands is included there. Nothingagainst

http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=1 - Amorphis-Progressive/Death/Doom Metal, Modern Rock/Melodic Metal (later)
http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=1185 - Novembre-Gothic/Doom/Death Metal
http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=333 - Eternal Tears of Sorrow-Thrash Metal (early), Melodic Death Metal (later), Symphonic Death Metal (Now) (No problem with this being removed.)
http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=164 - Theatre of Tragedy-Doom/Death Metal (early), Atmospheric Gothic Metal (now)
http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=3377 - Lacrimas Profundere-Gothic/Doom Metal (early), Gothic Rock (now)
http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=2443 - Lake of Tears-Progressive/Doom/Gothic metal
http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=802 - Type O Negative-Gothic Metal w/ alternative, doom and other influences

Did I miss anyone? The Kinslayer 16:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


  • OK, EToS removed, but still... Keep in mind that these metal-archives entries aren't that relevant as compared to doom-metal.com bandlist (which is long time runnung site dedicated exclusively to doom metal). There are near 900 bands featured in doom-metal.com's bandlist and no Amorphis, Type O Negative, Theatre Of Tragedy, Novembre for obvious reason: they are not doom.
  • The problem with all these bands is that they maybe do have a little coincidencies with doom metal to someone's ears, but actually, they are not doom bands. One or two kinda doomy riffs or few occasionaly "slow, sad and dark" songs doesn't make one band doom metal. The problem is that these bands don't have even one album or EP which is doom metal, so they are so far to be considered as doom bands in at least one moment of their careers. As you can see, even these tags from metal-archives suggest that these bands are too much of "something else" than a doom metal and you see too much combination of progressive/gothic/gothic rock/atmospheric/symphonic etc.

It's better to remove these bands from this list because:

  • it isn't a quite large list of doom bands as it is perhaps DM.com's bandlist
  • no problem that there's a few of not so "hardcore" and clearly doom bands such as Saint Vitus or Candlemass, but these that we are now talking about are so HIGHLY doubtable (and btw. I think that so many of experienced doom fans or people from the scene will not consider them as doom by any chance), and then it's better to remove 'em.
  • although it's not supposed to be a large list of artists, it's then supposed to have a names which are representative or at least close to be representative of the genre.
  • this page should be informative for, let's say, someone whos totally unacknowledged about a genre but started to be interested about it...
  • but, with these bands such as Type O Negative and Amorphis (actually, all of the mentioned but especially these) whos already pretty well known by the most of the "average" metalheads this could be very misleading to introduce 'em with the genre. Nothingagainst 17:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I removed Dead To Fall. They are obvisioly no doom metal band. Their wikipedia entry lebel 'em simply as metalcore as far as their metal-archives entry. No doom-metal.com entry, of course. Nothingagainst 11:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also removed: Abhorrence. Death Metal band. Nothingagainst 11:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your edits on Chalice, Lacrimas Profundere, Novembre, and Theatre of Tragedy. IMO, all these bands have (or in ToT's and LP's cases, used to have) significant doom elements. Your version of doom metal seems to include only those bands working in an overtly Black Sabbath-influenced style, which is inconsistent with usual usage.--Jsorens 19:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reinserting all the above except the one that was not Doom. Your giving undue weight to a single source. You have one source where they aren't listed as Doom (not specifically stated as not being Doom), there are MULTIPLE sources saying they are doom. This isn't a list based on your solitary opinion, and as the above post shows, I'm not the only one feeling your trying to muscle your own POV onto the list. The Kinslayer 15:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's always a question about these multiple sources - how relevant and trustworthy they are. Again, doom-metal.com is long-running site & COMMUNITY of doom fans all around the world which is dedicated exclusively to doom metal, then logically there should be given a priority to their bandlist. That site and their bandlist is not a "solitary opinion" such mine and yours could be, but is built on a COMMUNITY OPINION (which often included a lot of compromises about some "doubtable bands"). I'm however not speaking in the name of that community but pointing out on it as a relevant and probably the most trustworthy source on internet dedicated for this subject. Not to mention that there are a lot of other doom sources/communities (kind of "elitist") which make even doom-metal.com to look as kind of over-compromised.
  • "My own" version of doom metal does not "include only those bands working in an overtly Black Sabbath-influenced style". For example, I added some sludge/doom bands in here even one drone/doom (Trollmann av Ildtoppberg). I do not question for example My Dying Bride, Winter or old Anathema - knowing that these were clearly a death/doom... Doom Metal in mix with Death Metal.
  • ...but I'm pointing out at Amorphis. Above bands I mentioned belong (or used to) doom metal scene because their doom metal sides were DOMINANT to be long ago seen as a doom bands. Amorphis didn't ever had a dominant doom side, only a few ELEMENTS, which is not enough to be seen as a part of doom metal scene. No entry in doom-metal.com's bandlist perfectly approve that. Same goes to Theatre Of Tragedy, Novembre and Daylight Dies. I think that now is a little more clear why Type O Negative should be immediately removed.
  • This list here was a lot messy, a lot of bands added without being doom metal at all, origins of some bands listed wrong and even Nightwish was there. It's obvious that some of the entries were added by someone who have so little or no knowledge about a genre. Additions as Nightwish, Dead To Fall or Moi de Moix should be seen as a pretty close to vandalizing, as well as Type O Negative.
  • Although I think that Chalice and Lacrimas Profundere could be a bit misleading and aren't that necessary nor representative, there are still for some reasons their entries in DM.com bandlist, and because Jsorens insist, then feel free to let 'em back for now. I don't want to participate in edit wars or "muscle my opinion onto the list". I will however remove again Type O Negative and Amorphis for the obvious reasons I listed above. Nothingagainst 00:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this is my IP, because you questioned that my agreement with unregistered user about Amorphis was fake. Nothingagainst. 213.//edited later 00:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Nothingagainst 18:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did read this debate, and to quote WP:V:
Editors adding new material should cite a reliable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor.
The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not with those seeking to remove it.
The Kinslayer provided a source citing the bands as doom for each and every one, making them valid for inclusion per WP:ATT. In order to have them removed your going to need more than a site that makes no mention at all. I can also provide multiple sources asserting their genre if required. So far the inclusion argument is rooted in reliable sources and policy, while your side of the argument seems to be rooted in a website that doesn't mention them at all (therefore they should be removed? no.) and your own opinion that they are not doom. DarkSaber2k 11:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. In order to remove Amorphis and Type O Negative there is no doubt for any average or even little experienced fan of doom metal that they shoud be removed.
2. The Kinslayer and you didn't show yet any single of your own opinion about the subject, which make your knowledge & experience about the subject very questionable. Seems that only argument both of you can use are these metal-archives links.
3. I may notice that The Kinslayer also didn't show a good will to discuss in a civil manner, but slightly provoked and showed a slight intention towards starting a edit wars.
4. And yet, you still didn't gave a reasonable explanation why these metal-archives entries are "more reliable source" than http://www.doom-metal.com/frame_bandlist.html . I already gave a long explanations (twice!) why doom-metal.com's bandlist is more trustworthy source - and obviously as even the site's name clearly suggest it's a community-based place exclusively for DOOM METAL, the subject we are here dealing with. Again, metal-archives is not a site dedicated exclusively not to even a single style of metal, only a entry archive of countless number of various metal bands.
5. Metal-archives link for Amorphis not state 'em clearly as a doom metal band http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=1 : "Progressive/Death/Doom Metal, Modern Rock/Melodic Metal {later)" Add that there's no Amorphis in doom-metal.com's bandlist and some comments above also suggest that they should be not in here too.
6. This gaven metal-archives link for Type O Negative even more clearly suggest that they are not doom metal band: http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=802
"GOTHIC METAL w/ alternative, doom and other INFLUENCES" (meaning: they are not doom metal band)
7. Discuss about this instead of acting slightly uncivil with intentions for starting a edit war which will soon led to vandalizing of the article (I don't want to participate in that). Thank you. Nothingagainst 12:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Metal-archives is a peer-reviewed community site, therefore it is at least as reliable as your source. And as I stated earlier, I can provide other, equally reliable sources, that state Doom was a genre for these bands at some point in their career which is the scope of this list. As I keep stating (and you keep ignoring), Wikipedia policies fully support the inclusion of information that has a reliable source. You have been unable to demonstrate why metal archives is unreliable (despite your insistence it is), and WP:V states that is sources can be found to support the information, then it is well within policy to include it. You can re-state those 7 points in as many different ways as you like, but it wont change Wikipedia policy. You have an absence of information to support your claim (they aren't listed on a Doom metal project site, therefore they aren't Doom), but we have actual verifiable, reliable sources (is this part sinking in yet?) that state that at some point in their career they played music that was classed as Doom. So lets recap:
1. Metal Archives is a peer-reviewed community site, therefore it is a reliable source. I'm still waiting for your explanation of why this isn't a reliable source.
2. Your justification is based on an absence of information.
3. Our justification is based on actual information.
4. Our argument is based on wikipedia policies, yours is seemingly based squarely on your opinion of the bands.
5. While I can't speak for The Kinslayer, I'm not expressing my opinion on these bands because of WP:NPOV. Whether or not I (or you) consider these bands Doom metal is irrelevent to the fact that the scope of this list is for bands that played doom metal at some point in their career. The fact that there are multiple, non-trivial independent sources that support the claim that they are/were doom metal is enough for them to be included on this list AND satisfy Wiki policy too.
DarkSaber2k 13:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the interests of ending this amicably, I've requested someone from Wikiproject Metal take a look at this debate and give their opinion since we're just arguing in circles! DarkSaber2k 16:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I should now only take a point at this... again:

Here: "This is a list of doom metal bands, with country of origin in parentheses. Note that this list includes bands that have at some point in their careers played doom metal."

  • Metal-archives (as your chosen source) about Type O Negative:

"Gothic Metal w/ alternative, doom and other influences" - this is by no means verifable, and does not indicate that they ever PLAYED doom in their career. This one clearly clarifies that they played gothic metal but were only influenced by doom metal amongst other influences. Also, briefly given genre description from metal-archives about Amorphis did not clearly indicated did they ever played more on the side of doom metal or progressive or death metal. So, not being listed on DM.com's bandlist only confirm that they didn't ever actually PLAYED doom metal but SOMETHING ELSE in fact.

  • Also, from doom-metal.com's bandlist:

...Bands that have shifted a lot between styles will usually be placed in the, for doom-metal, genre they played the longest. So if a band made 2 death/doom albums, 1 epic doom album and 5 country and western records they would be listed as death/doom. Given this is the doom-metal genre they released most albums in.
Helping out
We encourage both bands themselves as well as fans to e-mail us updates, corrections or additions at: (e mail). Please keep in mind when you suggest a band that this is a doom-metal list and we are really aware of every big name. So please do not suggest Type O Negative, Tristania, Therion, Dark Tranquillity, etc, etc. or your other favourite non doom bands (exp. please stop suggesting Gothic-metal bands!). Of course we also like those bands but this is a list of DOOM-METAL bands. http://www.doom-metal.com/frame_bandlist.html

  • So, it's easy to conclude that doom-metal.com's bandlist have the same rule following as this list here, then it's the best factual source for this article. As being exclusively dedicated just for matter of doom metal and being also a peer-reviewed community site, it's logical that it takes priority above metal-archives. Nothingagainst 18:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • FWIW, I agree that Type O Negative isn't doom at all, and I'm on the fence about Amorphis (only one doom-y album). With these borderline cases, there can be legitimate disagreement, and I don't see any way to resolve it except with a vote or moderator's decision. On Novembre, Lacrimas Profundere, and Theatre of Tragedy, I don't see how anyone could not admit that they were at one time "doom metal." Here's the Wikipedia definition of doom metal: "Doom metal is heavy, and compared to other metal genres - slow. Also, lyrics play very important role in this genre and they rife with pessimism, evoking an atmosphere of darkness, despair and misery." All three of those bands played slow and heavy music. All three of them have melancholy ("pessimistic") lyrics during the same stage of their careers.--Jsorens 19:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm willing to agree with removing Type O Negative, but as you said, Amorphis did have an album that seems to be widely classed as Doom, meaning they are right to be on the list. They have a note stating it is their early work, and the list IS for any band that played Doom, even if it was just one album. DarkSaber2k 19:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amorphis didn't had a doom metal album. "Tales From The 1000 Lakes" is not doom metal album. Nothingagainst 23:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I put Lacrimas Profundere back. Their wikipedia article, Doom-metal.com bandlist, AND Metal Archives say they're doom. Besides, I found nothing here on the talk page justifying their removal. --Presto K. (talk) 05:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tiamat were doom.[edit]

Tiamat must be in here. They really were doom. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.112.15.197 (talk) 16:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No... IMO:

  • "Sumerian Cry" - death metal
  • "Astral Sleep" - melodic death metal
  • "Clouds" - gothic/death metal with death/doom elements
  • "Wildhoney" - atmospheric metal with progressive and death/doom elements
  • "A Deeper Kind Of Slumber" - goth-influenced psychedelic metal
  • "Skeleton Skeletron" - gothic metal/rock
  • "Judas Christ" - gothic metal/rock
  • "Prey" - gothic metal

Also, not listed in doom-metal.com's bandlist. Nothingagainst 19:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the original poster. Both Clouds and Wildhoney had doom pieces, so the band should be included.--Jsorens 13:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nothingagainst, the title of this list is NOT List of bands that are Doom in nothingagainsts opinion The Kinslayer 15:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it isn't. I stated my opinion and gave a relevant source to check. As I said, few borrowed or similar doom ELEMENTS does not make a band doom metal at all. In the Tiamat's case even a "less-priority" source metal-archives doesn't list 'em as even close to doom. http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=859 Nothingagainst 00:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you citing Metal Archives? You were insinuating they were completely unreliable further up the page. DarkSaber2k 11:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because even that source (metal-archives) which is all the time used by The Kinslayer doesn't list Tiamat as doom metal. I don't however insinuate that this source is COMPLETELY unreliable, but compared to doom-metal.com's bandlist IS much less trustworthy source. Nothingagainst 13:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree here, I can't find any sources that have actually listed Tiamat as Doom Metal. DarkSaber2k 20:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
According to WP:RS it's a perfect source for this. Has it occured to you that your 'defintive' list could easily have gaps in it? The absence of a band from that list is not proof that that band has no right to be on the list. DarkSaber2k 13:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you actually see that Tiamat isn't mentioned as doom in any context on your source? Nothingagainst 16:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just wondering the same thing, why you cited Metal Archive when earlier you had said they wern't reliable for this list. Anyways, I'm taking a wikibreak from now. The Kinslayer 16:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tiamat were doom.[edit]

Clouds is a doom. It's true because this album have nothing to do with goth or death metal. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.112.15.197 (talk) 18:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Agree. "Clouds" is the only doom album by Tiamat. And, IMHO, "Clouds" is the canonical doom album. The doomest of all doom albums of all doom-metal groups. 195.64.201.37 (talk) 10:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Graveworm[edit]

Why Graveworm not mentioned? Their first album "When Daylight's Gone" (©1997) has "extremely heavy influences from doom metal" ( Wikipedia article), so it can be stated as "gothic doom-black metal". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.64.201.37 (talk) 10:50, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some bands should be realy removed[edit]

Why the hell Amorphis and Type o Negative are still in the list?! I am big fan of Amorphis and heard so much songs from the TON and i see the nothing full-doomy in their stuffs only influences. As i ever said influences per se does'nt make a band straightforward doom metal (no i don't mean only trad.doom for that matter. All of mentined band in the list must have an dominant doom-side not only influences of doom) bands. BTW Nothingagaints is raight ,that these bands does'nt fit to doom metal-scene ,because they are not doom at all! Also when many people said the "gloom&doom" in the reviews of Amorphis classic Tales from the 1000 Lakes it does'nt mean doom metal, it is eel and atmosphere of that album.

Type O Negative should definitely be removed. I'm on the fence about Tales from the Thousand Lakes; I certainly don't think it's obvious that it's not doom: slow, sad, heavy, the basic elements are there.--Jsorens 17:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, youre right but only in other hand. Certanly the doomiest song in the Tales From the 1000 Lakes is offcourse just fse the classic "Black Winter Day". It is very gloomy, rather sad and very heavy and especially very Black Sabbath-feel. But i recommended you (Jsorens. if some person dont understand i mean who) to listen to Tales From the Thuosand Lakes again or just really beause it is definitely not doom at all. Actually "Drowned Maid", "First Doom" and opening "Into Hiding" are based typical melodic death metal's fast NWOBH and thrash/speed metal (ie-At the Gates)-tempo-variations. Only doom-mention for Amorphis are "Black Winter Day". So it's hard even considere band doom metal if they had only one doomy song. Cetainly The Karelian Isthmus can more considered doom than Tales. But also Karelian is not doom at all. Especially very gloomy and doomy-sylish heavy songs are "The Gathering" and very gloomy "The Lost Name of God" ,but only these. It's obvously the strong influence of the doom. If you listen to The Karelian Ithmus you hear more blast beat and especially thrash based fast parts. Simply it's not doom at all. And Type O Negative had nothing to do with doom metal.

  • I like that album too, but it's however very, very hard to call it doom metal. Doomy by "a feel"? Perhaps is, but it's not very objective to call it doom metal because it lacks the structure of doom metal. At the end it's simply a progressive/melodic death metal album with a lot an of folk influences. There's not too much of basic elements of doom metal. It's not slow. Sure, there are none of blast-beats, the album is mostly in some mid-tempo, but it's done actually in very dynamic and up way. Also, there's a certain lack of doom-structured riffs. The album is focused on melodic death metal riffs, and these melodies often end up being very folkish too. Again, there are a lot of solos, as well as non-background keyboards which made this album to be very progressive. It's also clear that Amorphis later became a totally prog metal band and it started right here from the Tales... album. Their debut is however a quite typical early 90s Euro death metal... Sad? Well, it's very subjective and personal experience of music... I personally don't find this album sad, nor more than a half of doom metal in general. Yes, most of doom metal bands often use a minor scales, but that's not a genre-defining rule however. What is "heavy" is also hard to define sometimes, but when something is very melodic like this album, it's clear that it have a more "catchy" than "heavy" value... Amorphis doesn't belong here, because at the end this is list of doom metal bands (there are included some of doom bands who are from non-traditional doom metal too, but they are here because they have a dominant doom side in their music, which Amorphis never had), but I don't think this is a list of bands which someone finds "doomy". Nothingagainst 22:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bethlehem[edit]

Bethlehem (German band) is, or at least was at one time, dark metal. Wasn't dark metal originally a species of doom? Additionally, Bethlehem is included in Category:Doom metal and does not appear on other metal genre lists (there is no list for dark metal).--Jsorens 17:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually "dark metal" is not a subgenre within the doom scene. However, few of it's influences dark metal took from doom metal (but none from traditional and original sense of doom metal nor old Black Sabbath), but like gothic metal it isn't a part of doom scene. Nothingagainst 17:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But if that's true, then there should be a "list of dark metal bands," but there isn't one right now.--Jsorens 17:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Ocean[edit]

if Isis, Neurosis, Callisto, Cult of Luna are doom, what's wrong with The Ocean being doom, too? After all, they always refer to their music as 'ambient soundtrack doomrock' (whatever that might be)... I mean, they used to sound more like Isis than Isis themselves MamaJohnny 16:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Black Sabbath[edit]

Should early Black Sabbath be on this list? There is an edit war going on concerning their inclusion. What sources do we have? Nothingagainst has presented a source that says that they are. Are there any sources that say that they weren't? Perhaps this is a case of them being influential, or defining the genre that they pre-dated? Anyway, please stop edit warring and talk out your differences. I'm sure you can reach a compromise.-Andrew c [talk] 14:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Black Sabbath should be on the list, because they pioneered and are the foundation of whole doom metal genre. An unregistered user (with IP 156.34....) is constantly removing their entry from this list. I gave a sources which list 'em as doom metal (metal-archives and doom-metal.com links), but I only got this rude response from this user: "cleanup incorrect entry... only inbred retards read metal-archives... see WP:RS". Well, what can I say, but only that he or she is breaking a Neutral Point Of View rule and because of some strange reason probably just want to vandalize the entry and start edit war. I'm sorry if I made a wrong conclusion, but I'm in doubt about intents of that unregistered user here according to his or her edits and comments in history section... Or maybe this article needs to be locked for unregistered users? Nothingagainst 19:19, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cephalic Carnage, Dead To Fall, Godflesh, TITD etc[edit]

Hey, can someone right now explain me should these bands, be on the list? Some relevant sources, stating them as doom metal, as far as i've heard their stuffs. And Opeth. They have even album what is based doom metal. And ETOS (early), Sentenced and Amorphis. They influenced, by Paradise Lost's Mid-period and early stuff. And Celtic Frost. Their, comeback album Monotheist is gothic doom metal. Doomfall 19:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amorphis have already been discussed. Maybe Celtic Frost could be listed based on Monotheist. The rest are definitely not doom metal.Bloodredchaos 15:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I altought added Dead To Fall to list of doom bands. If they even called themselves a doom band, in interview, then that would be absolutely a very good reason to adding them into list. Doomfall 16:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh bands?[edit]

Why are Welsh bands shown with a Welsh flag but other British bands only shown as British and not English, Northern Irish or Scottish? Surely we need some kind of uniform approach here brob (talk) 00:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This has been brought up elsewhere. The use of flags on these lists probably already contravenes WP:FLAG as it is, but as it is people pretty much uniformly want them to stay. If that's the case, the flags should reflect nationality (i.e. British, rather than Enlgish, Welsh etc.); this is the convention being used on other lists at present. What I find even more pointless is the use of the UN flags for bands with members of mixed nationality; they need replacing really. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:18, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal[edit]

I know many, (if not all of you) are incredibly tired of people adding bands with no articles to these lists, especially, along with links that are blue but are disambiguation pages or something else along with not even being the "x" genre of metal it's supposed to be. I was thinking of making a rule box or something similar like a section for it, instead of it being with the context/intro. For example, bands that are added because the editor wants an article on them very badly, people who just look over our (damned) comments, the people that don't check their links for the right article and those links that lead to disamb pages that don't have the band or you would have to make a huge search for the band and the bands that are not even part of the genre. If there was a "master list" that I know of where all editors that edit these lists would see it, then it would've been better to put this there and as there are many metal lists it would be insane to put them all over which I might want to do anyway if you accept my proposal or better yet show you here and you decide how we should go along with it and to fight those that add redlinks and remove bands they dislike, etc. Something must be done and I thought those hidden comments were enough and it's clearly not. I also think this would make a good explanation to editors who do this type of thing as a warning on their talk pages which is an action we can partake. Here is my proposal below:

This will be part of the introduction to an editor for his warning:
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to add bands to this list, the last band you added was a red-link, was not the intended article or has notability concerns on it's article page. Hereby you must follow to these guidelines for band inclusion to this list:

Article rules/warning explanation:
Bands without articles will hastily be removed from these lists. This list is not merely the place for you to add bands of the style that you want an article for, this is a list of "x" bands with articles nothing more. You can do this exactly at Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers and bands but they must pass WP:MUSIC to be acceptable here. Also, please click the "show preview" button next to the "save page" button to check your article links before adding them here and that you also have the right band that plays the genre. This is not of your personal opinion of what the band actually plays, the band's genre must have been approved either by verifiability with other editors or sources stated in that respective article. Also, make sure a band is notable, if a band is being questioned for notability has a notability tag at the top of the page then it should not be added to this list, wait awhile and re-add them when the notability of the band has been established. Please make sure bands are alphabetised and that the formatting is consistent with the other bands before adding them. Thank you.

I hope this proposal goes well. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ kaiden 05:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, I like the idea man. But how is this going to trigger? is it like all HTML'd and stuff I don't understand or is it some person who catched the person themselves? I would like though, one thing, if the band added is a 'red' link and a death metal band...if that band is notable, I think we should create a 'death metal article to be made list' so that all the notable bands go on wikipedia. My last header, was saying this, I don't think we should just delete bands becuase the wikipedians before us haven't bothered to get information and make a dam article for them, do we?

Also, this way you get notable bands, becuase of wikifacists like speedy deletion service jeps the dam articles you make, just becuase you translate the biography into english and change a few sentences and that somehow interfers with G what the fuck O laws. Bullshit. Anyway, yeah nice idea, but ant going to work...you still going to have fags that think Bullet for my valentine are metal.

METALFREAK04 (talk) 14:25, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well it would be like User warning templates, if you catch them you warn them and if they persist well... I never thought of that but they would keep on being reverted until the link is blue, that's for sure. And of course, if a band is surely notable we'll have a list here (wouldn't make sense to have a death metal band article to be made list anyways (and would have to start with "Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/. . .")) for them (which I'm not sure can stay up here, as this page would need to get archived within time) and also at the request article link I provided. Also, the amount of editors we will need will be like the size of a taskforce (albeit small one) for this to be carried out well. I've been thinking I should really add this to all the other lists.
All I ask for is for people like you and everyone who edits these lists help in notifying these type of users. If that can be done then that's the least you could do for these lists. Have hope, and let's make an example for them. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ kaiden 06:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Training for Utopia[edit]

Should Training for Utopia be included on this list? Their MusicMight database biography describe one of their albums as "drawing appreciation from the Sludgecore crowd."[1] Is that enough to warrant inclusion?--3family6 (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You'd really need a source stating that they are a sludgecore band. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:29, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then. I do not really care either way. As that is the only source that mentions anything about them sounding like that, I'll just leave them off the list, unless someone else has a different opinion. --3family6 (talk) 21:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August Burns Red[edit]

When I first saw August Burns Red listed on this article I thought I was hallucinating. But they were reliable sourced, so I decided to be fair and check the source in question. Aside from the style list by the side (which isn't used for citations), it doesn't specifically refer to the band or album as doom metal or any of the other terms that would get a band listed here, so I removed the band. Then my edit gets reverted because stoner metal is mentioned in the article, and apparently a mere reference to stoner metal in the main text makes August Burns Red a doom band.

The sentence that mentions stoner metal, quoted from the Allmusic review above: "Still, elements of vintage '70s metal do thread through these 11 songs, rather like a less snarky version of the Eagles of Death Metal or any of the Kyuss-inspired stoner metal bands without the bongwater buzz."

Is there any part of that sentence, or the review itself, that actually calls August Burns Red a stoner metal band, or Messengers a stoner metal album? There's "elements that are similar to", that's really not enough to keep the band on the list considering how controversial an entry they are. --LordNecronus (talk) 22:08, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Originally I had thought Allmusic tags reliable, but found out otherwise when my edit was changed from the band bio to the Messengers album. Someone other then me changed it to the Messengers, so I felt it was reliable enough to keep.--3family6 (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of doom metal bands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:33, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on List of doom metal bands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:08, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on List of doom metal bands. 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) 01:34, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of doom metal bands. 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) 10:55, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_doom_metal_bands&oldid=1207012863"