text:
Talk:National Socialist black metal

New Sections
New Sections: Intend to add information about the NSBM controversy among BM listeners in "NSBM in the Broader Black Metal Scene." In "National Socialism in Early Black Metal" will probably cite Burzum's "My Journey to the Stars", Darkthrone's "Jewish Behavior" and "Aryan Black Metal" stuff, etc. Suggest that if someone actually comes along and wants to add something that they do something along those lines. --68.6.244.91 06:03, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Deletions
About my edit: Eliminated the bit about about NSBM bands lacking an understanding as to the true meaning of "Aryan" (Criticism of Nazi useage of the term belongs in the entry about Aryans itself) Also eliminated "Some believe that Christianity originated as a Jewish conspiracy to control Aryans to push their Zionist agenda forward." I think it should stay out unless someone can actually produce a source. I'm not an expert on NSBM but I've yet to hear the anti-christian thing put this way. Few more general attempts at improvement. --68.6.244.91 05:46, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

 * That's actually straight out of Nazi rhetoric. Most of them hated Christianity and endured it for practical reasons. Nietzsche also circumspectly refers to it as a Judean religion. www.anus.com 03:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Burzum
Burzum's Black Metal albums aren't NSBM, altough his latter works (mostly electronic) could be called NS music. They are, however, not BM and thus Burzum can't be called NSBM music.

- Burzum's Black Metal albums aren't NSBM indeed. As i said beneath, Varg claimed to not even be socialist on a national level, so he cannot be linked to NSBM. I believe, however, in the period he called himself a "nazi" (which he later claimed was a politcally incorect term to use for his ideas). His "Ambient" keyboard albums are more related to his "heathen", or rather, Odalistic ideas. They are not National Socialistic! refernce: A Burzum Story: "The Nazi Ghost" Darksteel 14:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

 * I very much disagree. On the first album, 'Burzum' (self-titled), the lyrics "War between the races" can be found on the song 'My Journey to the stars'. Simply because the music isn't filled lyrically with mindless slogans, doesn't mean such music wasn't made to represent a certain ideology. Burzum is probably the founder of the NSBM genre. Nagelfar 04:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You need to give a better example than that one. The phrase appears at the end of the song, and the other lyrics have no such content. My interpretation is more of a general chaotic misanthropic feeling there at the end. It says: "Darkness, Hate and Winter Rules the Earth when I Return, War Between Races, A Goal Is Reached, Chaos, Hate". Lots of hate, but quite unfocused ;) --Unsound 17:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

- Burzum may very well have inspired the NSBM genre, but that will not say it's one of the founders. Varg has said in his article on A Burzum story: "The Nazi Ghost": (reference):

I have also experienced that most of the people supporting me or what I stand for are so-called "nazis" - while almost everybody else has just condemned me and then boycotted me and everything I have done. What makes me different from the "nazis" are basically three things; unlike them I am not socialistic (not even on a national level), I am not materialistic and I believe in (the ancient Scandinavian!) democracy.

As you can see, he is not a socialist (and not even in a national way), and thus not a nazi. I will not say he doesn't interpretent Odalism in a racist way. He doesn't want to mix with other "colored" people. He says he wants to stick to his culture etc. It is not because he makes a song called "War between the Races" that he has to be a nazi. Some people need to draw a line between racism and Nazism. Also the reason why he made his BM is to boycot the Death metal scene. reference: A Burzum Story: "The Nazi Ghost" Darksteel 14:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The flaw in this argument is that whatever it's problems, socialism is not the same as National Socialism, a fact that Hitler himself expounded on repeatedly (see his comments in Mein Kampf about socialism. National socialism owes more to Prussian socialism than Marx). All Nazis and neo Nazis despise socialism. In fact, socialists in Germany were some of the first sent to the camps (see https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists). Socialism and Nazism are mutually exclusive, not inclusive for both economic and cultural reasons, therefore Varg's statement is disingenuous, as any student of history or politics would know.

 * I found page www.nbsm.org where burzum is listed as one of bands. 04:59, 08 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.124.69.174 (talk)

--

The fragment "war between the races" is most definitely inspired by the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. In case you didn't know, his stories are usually based on fantasy worlds with different races, including humans, elves, orcs etc. Therefore, I am convinced that he is alluding to these races, and not the ones of todays humans. Vikernes has stated in interviews that he was inspired by such works as the ones of Tolkien in the beginning of Burzums creation.

Let's not forget that Burzum's first works were produced al Deathlike Silence Prod., Euronymous' label. Euronymous was member in the most radical communist party in Norway, so Varg's first albums can't be labeled as NS.

I agree, and besides, the NSBM comminity may create music like Black Metal, the scene is totally different and these differences need to shown, and thus, the articles NSBM and Black Metal should be seperated. 80.57.77.199 16:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Euronymous also practiced in a room decked out in both Communist and Nazi flags. www.anus.com 03:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Euronymous maybe a WWII hobbyist, semi-historian or at least an interested of it or he might be a National-Bolshevik. 80.57.77.199 16:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I would like to add to these comments, that the claim that Burzum founded NSBM or even makes NSBM seems to be based solely on circumstantial assumption or are backed by dead links to media with no apparent link to the metal scene with any knowhow of black metal or the themes presented in Burzum's music. There's also a large difference between racism and national socialism. Labelling something as national socialism solely on a few quotes gives this article very little credibility, particularly since as the article states his work doesn't involve and national socialist themes whatsoever. Also as quoted within these comments, Vikernes specifically distances himself from national socialism and clarifies the only thing he and NS have in common is they "embraced our Pagan religion as our blood-religion and they rejected Judeo-Christianity as Jewish heresy". The claims made in this article seem completely baseless and absurd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.210.111.184 (talk) 22:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I´d like to add: Even the Wikipedia article about Burzum does not have the category National Socialist black metal musical groups Quote: "Although Vikernes is known for his political views, he does not use Burzum to promote those views. Burzum has never played live and Vikernes says he has no intention of doing so." Therefor Burzum is not NSBM. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Burzum#NSBM_allegations --Serhayn (talk) 16:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Questions
Though NSBM is different from the Black metal scene, it is still a subgenre right? Shouldn't the template be Black Metal instead of just Metal?

how can a nationa socialist be anti christianity? i mean, the church may not be the best thing of he world but it's a important weapon to destroy jews.

I'm glad I can find intelligent thoughts on this page... marnues 06:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't Metal music be considered degenerate art by Nazis? It is rather atonal and would be traced back to what Hitler would regard as a negroid form of music. Therefore I can't believe that these people are legitimate National Socialists. Racists, perhaps and perhaps they admire Hitler, but they don't seem to have Nazi art values.

If you want to get down to it, NSs are not nazis. They are tied to NS of 30's and 40's Germany through more general philosophy than any incredible love of the word of Hitler. Besides, there still plenty of people who trace the roots of rock purely to European folk and forget about the whole blues thing. Plus metal itself is a predominantly white form of music. marnues 01:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Who traces rock to European folk music? Tuf-Kat 02:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Anymore, mostly people who can't stand to think the music they love has any ties to African culture. Though it would be difficult to say European music isn't an influence. marnues 04:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

??NSBM??
unusual to find this here, because NSBM isnt even an official black metal subgenre. whether you like what i am about to say or not, i suggest this page to be deleted, because it is just a propaganda name used long ago during the black metal hype, as the media wanted everyone to be scared of black metal, saying it not only promotes satanism (which it does) and nazism (which doesnt). true, there are nazi bands out there, but they are not black metal, and do not play black metal music, whether it would be the lyrical or the musical style. it should be deleted because it isnt an offical genre, and pretty much every band in this nsbm list has no popularity, whether it'd be mainstream or in the metal underground. it is only known of through the nazi music underground. in my opinion, if this page wont be deleted, it should be put in a seperate page only, which specifies on nazi music in general, because this is not black metal. take this seriously please, as im not just some guy who doesnt like nsbm, im coming from a neutral perspective. Okram 09 (talk) 08:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You could always try and get it deleted I suppose, but given the huge amount of coverage the subgenre has received it would almost certainly get speedily kept. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 17:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

BDSM?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.154.28.73 (talk) 20:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Let me start off by saying how great it is to have a chance to discuss 2 topics that i somewhat accel in, mostly regarding NS in a historical understanding, and even modern adaptations or ideologies that root from NS. I am also quite an active member of the BM community online and personally love the music. So i guess ill begin my official response by covering a few of the aforementioned claims and opinions. Lets start with the "NSBM isnt even an actual subgenre" statement. There are actually a few reasons why that statement is not only inaccurate, but it displays the ignorance of the author. As im sure most of us know, Black metal itself is a subgenre that literally umbrellas other subgenres, and any type of music that even remotely resembles the style that is 'Black Metal', can and usually is considered a branched subgenre. For example: Traditional pagan black metal (Burzum is a good example) vs Satanic Black metal (Mayhem), while the two styles or sounds are clearly separately distinguished, you can also clearly recognize both styles as a type of black metal, therefor they are both separated into two different subgenres. NSBM is no exception to that rule whether you like it or not. And i know political correctness and feelings are primary focus points for the left, but unfortunately, facts actually dont care, nor do i. NSBM has evolved into something brilliant. They have taken the overall style of BM and quite literally adjusted it to fit their particular theme. And did it quite well, might i add. Examples of NS black metal would be: Goatmoon, Wolfkrieg, Nattfog, Sunwheel, J*w Juice, Nokturnal Mortem, Clandestine Blaze, Capricornus, Dark Fury and a long list of other great and talented black metal bands or projects. I have come accross a few bad apples in the NSBM subgenre that were really just.... Noise. But that can be said for every subgenre within the BM umbrella. Another point i should cover is how well NSBM adapts to all BM styles while still holding onto that very extreme and aggressive sound, using riffs and drumming that make you feel like your in a warzone. Ive heard NS incorporate DS style, Symph, and my favorite style duo of all- Atmospheric NSBM. This makes NS one of the most diverse subgenres under the BM umbrella for the simple but brilliantly executed reason that instead of this particular subgenre bearing a title that describes its sound or its style, it bears a title that describes a theme. A political theme in this particular case. So that still is classified as a subgenre due to its distinguishable overall sound and style that differs from all other BM, but i must point out, the subgenre was also created with the ability to be an umbrella subgenre of its own by using a thematically descriptive name, which to me is brilliant and leaves room for so many creative sub-themes or sounds. So in conclusion, and i think i have presented enough factual data, explanations and examples, NSBM IS INDEED a subgenre of BM. Plus i dont know how you or anyone else can tell a group of bands that they arent allowed to be a subgenre of black metal or any genre/subgenre for that matter. Just because your political/religious ideologies may differ from the ideologies of a BM band, doesnt make that band any less BM than they actually are. They are the artists that are making the music so im pretty sure they are much more qualified when it comes to labeling themselves under the proper subgenre, than you are. I must also address another statement you made that claims "Black metal promotes satanism". There are a few problems with that statement and let me address them properly, to maybe play my hand at putting a stop to this whole "stereotyping of black metal" issue that is more common than id like it to be. Black metal, was NOT established to promote satan. It was not established based on the ideologies of satanism. It was not established with the intention of using satan as a mascot or theme. In fact, Satan had no hand in the start of BM. The original Black Metal bands, before greedy record labels and venue owners got their hands on the scene, was created for a few reasons, i will state 2 of them with explanations. 1. To counter the death metal scene and its "conforming" ideologies, its guidelines on what was and wasnt death metal and its religious content (and i dont mean Christian). Members of various Death metal bands departed from the DM scene and formed various bands to create a new style within metal subgenre, marking an extremely important and game changing point in history for metal music, creating something that would prove to be ever expansive, always evolving and bringing fresh ideas and sounds to the scene so there was always something new being released that was easily distinguishable from the last band/album, that was later dubbed "Black Metal". 2. To protest the church and its rapid-expanding population and all beliefs that stem from it. All ideas and characters that are derived from abrahamic religions. That includes satan. So while you are semi on the right track when it comes to your statement about the portrayal of BM in the news as a protest against BM, but those particular news portrayals mixed with record labels owned by the elite opposition are what gave birth to the Satanic BM scene and pushing that nonsensical ideology that plays as a recruiting tool and a distraction from real life topics that are relevant to current events. It is even commercially adaptable (as seen by various bands such as Behemoth, Dimmu Borgir, Ghost, and even examples of BM bands, that have seen semi commercial success) and the formula and pattern seems to be: The more commercially successful or popular in the mainstream, the more satanic it gets, even if on a subliminal level. Thats all for a reason. Just food for thought. Anyways, thanks for reading. I hope this clears up any common confusions or misconceptions of BM, potentially held by the reader. P.S. "Pagan" originally was to describe ancient religions/beliefs that predate Abrahamic religions. Heinrich Heðenson (talk) 06:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion debate
This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Splash talk 00:14, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Keep this article alive Heinrich Heðenson (talk) 06:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Famous Bands
If a band isn't famous enough to have a wikipedia entry, it isn't famous enough to be on this list. Other more popular genres might not have this distinction, but here it works wonderfully. marnues 08:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Why? People obviously look up the list to see if a band is NSBM or similar. Darksteel 15:55, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a directory in that sense, however. - Tiswas (t) 14:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Band list
This is starting to turn into a list. If the list is important, consider making a wikipedia list, with a link from this article to that list. Also, the current list should be shortened to the most notable bands. The first band to be in this genre would be a smart choice, and the ones with the most success. I am going to tag this article for clean up, also, because of the list.--   ¢²   Connor K.    13:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I removed Satanic Warmaster and Ad Hominem from the list, neither of these bands support NS ideologies although both band are extremely racist and do have lyrical themes that would lead them to be placed in the NSBM scene. Satanic Warmaster stated in a 2003 interview with Terrorizer that they were not NS and that it was a "common misconception" that they were. Ad Hominem states on their official Myspace: "DO NOT WRITE IF : You are not of european descent / You are into any kind of positive religion or politics / You are into "14 words" crap, loving life and believing in white man's rebirth / You are a degenerated scumbag metalhead just finding AH cool (for sure no one will recognize himself here!!)". As a side note I hope the irony of Ad Hominem's name becomes apparent when this is taken into account.

- while an openly racist act, Arghoslent play nothing like black metal, and so cannot be called NSBM. They should not be on an nsbm list

- Astrofaes seem not to be NSBM, but only use Slavonic nationalist poetry as a base for their lyrics. They should be removed from the list.

- I deleted the bands that are not NSBM or that not have a source to prove it. 88.70.175.121 00:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Strange sentence
"...NSBM might sound not much different from other metal sub-genres".

I don't understand this sentence fully. Is it meant to say "other BLACK metal sub-genres"? Surely even the avarage metal listener would be able to hear quiet a huge difference between NSBM and say Sepultura, Alice Cooper, Metallica or even "industrial" metal like Nine Inch Nails....? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.100.14.48 (talk) 12:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

Satanic Warmaster is not NSBM
I disagree with the person who tagged Satanic Warmaster as a NSBM band when there lyrics focus on Facist Occultism and not Nazi ideologies. There are main differances between fascism and nazism. Explore the topics more clearer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ilirik666 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

Sort of OT, but still...
Not that it matters for purposes of this article, but Heydrich was not "head of the gestapo". Well, he was, kind of, but that is like saying the President of the US is the top postal official. Technically it is true (in the sense the President of the US can fire the Postmaster General, and Heydrich could fire the Head of the Geheimestaatspolizei), but it kind of minimizes the person's title. Heydrich was head of the RSHA (Reichsicherheithauptamt, Head Office of Reich Security) which contained the Geheimestaatspolizei("Gestapo"), Sicherheitdeinst (Heydrich's previous command before the RSHA was formed), and Kriminalpolizei (Kripo).

In fact, to be technically exact, Müller was the head of the Gestapo, and Heydrich was his boss. So, I know it is way off topic, but I am going to make a slight alteration and change Heydrich from head of the Gestapo to head of the RSHA within the SS, which is what he really was. (After he was the head of the SD within the SS.)

Sorry, forgot to tack some tildes onto my last comment, so here goes: 76.100.205.82 02:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC) -You can find a lot of NSBM bands in Last.fm: THE URL is: http://www.lastfm.es/group/National+Socialist+Black+Metal/connections —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.126.129.68 (talk) 06:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Neo-nazi?
I think so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.211.47 (talk) 07:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Slight edit
Apologies for the slight edit with rationale. I removed the sentence stating that NSBM is regarded as an ideology not a subgenre, as it is impossible to play black metal in a National Socialist way. The rationale was two-fold: firstly, it's an unsourced and potentially POV statement; secondly, there is considerable confusion as to the distinction between ideology and subgenre... for example, people seem to get upset by including "unblack" metal bands on the List of black metal bands, despite the fact that the difference in styles is purely ideological. To maintain consistency we should adopt a consensus opinion on matters like this. My tuppence is that ideology / lyrical content is actually a fairly important part of what makes a genre (or subgenre) a genre (or subgenre). Anyway, I'll leave it for now, but regardless of consensus it needs a decent source, as I reckon it's a pretty contentious (maybe even OR) statement to make. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 13:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

November 2008
November 22 2008 AYPS: Extensively rewrote entry. Removed anti-NSBM sentiment. Attempted to clarify what NSBM is, along with some examples. Attempted to clarify confusion surrounding bands that are wrongly perceived as being NSBM. One can be a White Supremacist and not a National Socialist. One can flaunt National Socialist symbols and not support an ounce of White Supremacy. Examples, Graveland, Hate Forest, Darkthrone, Marduk. Burzum is problematic as there are too many conflicting statements, most of which have been made by Varg Vikernes himself. Removed section relating to NSBM and the broader Black Metal scene. One reference to Gardell's Gods of the Blood does not indicate whether NSBM is or is not a minority in the scene. Removed section relating to NSBM and the broader White Power movement. The late William Pierce of the National Alliance does not constitute the views of an entire movement. Ammended links. The Pagan Front is no longer "The Hammer of National Socialist Black Metal", it is currently "Heathen Metal Militia". You will note that Graveland was not listed on that site until after this change. NSBM.org is outdated, not being updated since 2006. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.51.165.187 (talk) 09:56, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

 * There's little point rewriting an article in its entirety if you're not going to use even a single source, so please refrain from adding POV and/or OR information. A couple of other (more minor) points... genres are not capitalised, so it is "black metal" and not "Black Metal", and there is no reason whatsoever to simply add lists of albums by non-notable bands (see WP:MUSIC) that you happen to like and/or think are important... having said all that, the article as it stands still needs more references, but the version I've reverted to is still far superior. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree completely with Blackmetalbaz.  ~Asarlaí  20:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Judging by the previous entry on the article, you are hardly any authority on the subject. Learn to accept that which is superior to you, and the world will become a much better place.

 * Please read WP:CIVIL. And please sign your posts with four tildes, just so we can keep track of just who's being rude :) Either way, if you disagree with another editor's work, then feel free to contribute your superior authority, using reliable sources to back up your claims. Oh, and one last thing... it helps to keep talk pages understandable if you could add comments in the appropriate place; this generally means directly below the person you're addressing, not at the top of a page. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 09:36, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

January 2009
We appear to have another rash of OR editing on this page. I appreciate that the whole article is a horrible mess anyway, but I am unconvinced that unsourced statements along the lines of "X is generally seen as Y within the scene" (even if this is true) are helpful to the article. This is a general plea to people to not add material to this, or any other article, without sources. This comment brought to you by no sleep and frustration at anonymous editors misunderstanding the difference between truth and verifiability. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 14:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Editing and improving the article
I have changed the article a bit, talked to Blackmetalbaz (see their user talk page) and planned to include information from the German article, which is longer and sourced. All others be informed that I use an access with a static IP adress and can be reached via its user talk page without any problems, but am not the only one to use it. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 13:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good, I'll see if I can help out a bit. Great care must be taken when talking about Christianity in Nazi Germany, as relations were largely strategic and Hitler was opposed to conventional Christianity. Dark Prime (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I know we must take care, but we should not forget that there were Protestant christians like those mentioned who supported Hitler, and Christian streams in National Socialism (see Positive Christianity) as well as pagan and occult tendencies, like Rosenberg, Himmler and the Thule Society. If you could also reference the opposition of the artists you mentioned, you would improve the article a lot. I remember an interview with Emperor Magus Caligula stating he was against Nazism but found positive aspects in it (with no further details), which can either mean he spoke thoughtlessly or worse; unfortunately, I might look for that one when I find the time to do so. And Erik Danielsson of Watain is a sensitive case, too, as he mentioned Hitler as a great visionary (though this was rather a praise of destruction than an approval of Nazism) and because of the shit that happened in Germany in 2006 (see Watain article). --132.187.3.26 (talk) 08:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll add the Erik and Caligula references now while I have the time. I'll find the King and Infernus ones later. Dark Prime (talk) 10:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW, who was the Catholic bishop that endorsed and praised the Nazi concentration camps in the 1930s upon inspection? I can't remember the name (Bruning or someone, wanted to include him in the article). Dark Prime (talk) 11:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I know there was a Brüning, but I am not sure if it was him. Including him would be a good idea, do it when you remember. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 09:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The Darkthrone case does not fit in at the moment. If somebody wants to put it back after I have removed it, please put it into the right context. For Varg Vikernes being the main man to have brought National Socialist beliefs into the black metal scene, Blackmetalbaz wants references. I can check the German book Unheilige Allianzen, but I have no English issue of Lords of Chaos, so if someone can look it up and give a further reference, it would be great. It is either in the Count Quisling chapter or the last one. And maybe check the Möbus interview for the sentence about Christianity enslaving the Aryans according to NSBM ideology. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 10:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The Pagan Front - A NSBM Organization
 * Southern Poverty Law Center reports
 * The NSBM FAQ
 * Decibel Magazine's in-depth NSBM article
 * I suggest removing these as well. They are of no use as links, but maybe can be used as sources, if someone dares to read them in order to improve the article. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 11:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have now finished translating and will provide the aforementioned Unheilige Allianzen reference soon. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 11:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks excellent, much better than any of the previous versions. I remembered the bishop in question was Berning of Osnabruck, but I haven't found any sources on the internet that explicitly state he endorsed the concentration camps. Might check around papers and books later. Dark Prime (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree the page looks vastly better than previous versions! One minor word of warning... don't get too bogged down in connections between Christianity and Nazism; that's very relevant to pages on that topic, but doesn't need to be covered in detail here. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 08:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it will still be okay if he adds that one example.
 * I will remove Erik Danielsson from the list, as I find his words rather dubious, considering his answer to the question what happened in Bad Berka (and, of course, what actually happened).
 * I haven’t watched the Dark Funeral interview on YouTube; does it back up Ahriman’s rejection of NSBM artists?
 * The Möbus interview in Lords of Chaos doesn’t explicitly back up the thought of Christianity as a Jewish instrument to enslave the Aryans, though Möbus calls it a non-semite version of Judaism, and sees the Jews as the Aryans’ antagonists. I will replace the reference, revert that if you disagree.
 * Someone will have to help me with the German quotes. I have no idea how the citation template for original quotes and their translation works. The German Wikipedia has such a template, here’s an example (see source code): de:Reign in Blood. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 09:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't remember if Ahriman himself talks about the subject in that video on youtube, although on the Black Metal: A Documentary recording (which seems to use these clips etc.) he talks about race being a pointless subject in black metal etc. Caligula goes into some depth about it in the youtube clip referenced - he said to some neo-Nazis 'put your hand down I don't believe in your fucking shit', and that when he talked about his "master race" it was a Satanist one, regardless of whether they were black, white, yellow etc. Dark Prime (talk) 09:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you know War from Sweden? This band (featuring, amongst others, former Dark Funeral member Blackmoon) said something similar about a Satanic master race, according to this review. One of the other members (can’t find the interview at the moment) said he doesn’t know what IT’s intentions were when writing the lyrics, but that he has no racist tendencies (see lyrics for “I Am Elite”). Ahriman contributed to a band called Wolfen Society, which is inspired by a secret society I never heard of, which Vincent Crowley of Acheron called an “Occultic Fascist movement” in this interview, whereas that one and the band site talk about Satanism and hatred for mankind as a whole. I also found the interview with Emperor Magus Caligula I had mentioned: . He says: “Ich finde es auch interessant darüber zu lesen und dergleichen, doch ich symphathisiere sicherlich nicht mit der damaligen Einstellung, auch wenn etwas davon gar nicht so verkehrt war.” And: “Ich will nicht behaupten dass die KZ's nicht schlimm waren, aber ich will auch nicht sagen dass sie so verdammt schlimm waren.” Which means: “I find it interesting to read about it and so on, but I surely don’t sympathise with the attitude, though some of it wasn’t that wrong” and “I don’t pretend the concentration camps weren’t bad, but I don’t want to say they were that bad either.” --132.187.3.26 (talk) 10:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * On War: I've known about them for sometime, and I've been quite suspicious about Blackmoon for that matter. So far I haven't seen any sources where he talks about his stances in regards to the "I am Elite" song.
 * On Wolfen Society: I know a bit about Vincent Crowley, but not that much, so I'm not sure what he means. From what I know of Wolfen Society, it's meant to be oriented around misanthropy (something often cited as a reason for opposing NSBM), and Lord Ahriman claims to be a serious misanthrope himself.
 * On Caligula's symapthy for aspects of Nazi ideology and concentration camps: I wouldn't be surprised if he was sympathetic to the repressive nature of these things in general, after he said he was "somewhat impressed" by Rodrigo Orias. I suppose he may well harbour an attitude like that of people such as Shyaithan of Impiety, who wrote about Auschwitz and Mengele in the song "Carbonised". Dark Prime (talk) 13:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I do recall Vincent Crowley being featured on Black Metal: A Documentary. I'll rewatch the bit about NSBM later to see if he had anything to say. Dark Prime (talk) 10:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, he did. I finally saw it, and he says he has no problem with it if it is done intelligently, whatever that means in his eyes. I also found the Blackmoon interview I mentioned: that one. I will remove Danielsson again and Blomberg too, as he stated he thinks Black Metal is for whites again in 2007 (as he did in 1994 and 1995 in Ablaze magazine and while interviewed by Moynihan or Søderlind). The interview referenced only says he does not care about the fans, which is because he is in it for the money, which he admitted, concerning Mayhem at least. So it is no proof at all. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 13:34, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Where did Hellhammer say that in 2007? Dark Prime (talk) 15:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW, Moynihan/Søderlind/Lords of Chaos are NOT very reliable sources (having been criticised by various metal muscians etc.). Dark Prime (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * He said that here, and I doubt it was satirical.
 * I know LOC is not necessarily reliable, but I think we can use the exclusive interviews, and if there were problems concerning those with Blomberg, he would probably have criticised that when talking about Moynihan, which he did in that one. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 12:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The first link was where I first read about Hellhammer's statements, and I found this in January - March 2006. This is older than 2007. Dark Prime (talk) 13:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * But nevertheless, it is newer than the half-hearted and unsincere statement I had removed for the reasons mentioned above. --132.187.3.26 (talk) 13:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism
There is a lot of vandalism on the page as of 10/3/09. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.34.209 (talk) 14:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite?
This article uses some lingo and writing clearly influenced by its own audience ("rapists", "pornographers" when referring to opponents). A more encyclopediac rewrite might be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.169.163.44 (talk) 03:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

List of NSBM bands?
Why is there only one band listed? Not saying that we should turn the article into one big list, but if we're only going to list one band then we might as well just delete this portion completely. 207.233.102.21 (talk) 04:16, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The sources for the 'list of notable bands' section are terrible
I have removed Hate Forest from the list of notable bands as neither linked source provide any evidence whatsoever for the claim that Hate Forest "[promote] National Socialist (Nazi) beliefs through their lyrics and imagery," as the genre is defined on this page. It's hard to imagine how a band that expends so much effort to remain anonymous (and never publish any lyrics) can be said to promote anything at all.

As to the sources: one is a left-wing blog that mentions the band in passing using weasel words (apparently 'some people' consider Hate Forest to be NSBM) and the second is a particularly poorly written album review reporting similar hearsay. The inclusion of a group amongst a list of notable Nazis is a serious accusation and requires much better evidence, which should at the very least conform to Wikipedia guidelines regarding the use of reputable unbiased sources.

If anything this list should be entirely removed, as inclusion within the genre is difficult to define / determine in all but the most obvious cases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.179.98 (talk) 07:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Since no one has responded I've decided to remove the list entirely. Absurd shouldn't be on the list because their NS music wasn't even black metal (see the comments above regarding Burzum). This would have left a list that just contained Nokturnal Mortum, which is stupid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.171.106.96 (talk) 05:09, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And someone put them back up. Drudkh has nothing to do with NSBM.

Notable Bands
We should make a section of notable NSBM bands, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diefromevileye (talk • contribs) 18:33, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

NSBM ≠ RAC
NSBM is Black Metal with National Socialist ideas. Rock against communism is based on Punk, Oi!, and other rock related genres. It's absurd to call rock and metal the same thing. Although they both can have NS or Anti-Communist views, RAC music has many differences such as being more in favor of bar fights and toughness where NSBM has Pagan spiritual themes and explores a lot of idealism of NS. I'd also like to add that not all RAC artists are NS but most of them are White nationalist (And not all white nationalists are NS or claim to be NS). Derpian (talk) 03:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Article Quality
Just having read a few parts of this article, I must say I am very impressed by how it deals with NSBM given how controversial the subject is and how few reliable resources there are on it as a whole; many interviews perhaps, but those do not necessarily apply to the whole. That could be improved upon, I suppose - the article has quite a few snippets from various artists rather than any general statements - but it's perfectly understandable, given the previous point. Very interesting topic, especially for any black metal fan. Definitely going to read the rest when I have time. 142.161.82.191 (talk) 03:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

DSBM
If NS black metal can have an article, why can't depressive black metal (DSBM) ?Second Skin (talk) 05:51, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The determining factor is how much DSBM is talked about in reliable sources. If you could find some good books or journal or magazine articles that talk about the style in-depth (not just a passing mention), then go ahead and create the article.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   |  See what I have done  ) 22:10, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Drudkh
Should Drudkh be listed? On the one hand, Olena Semenyaka of Politosophia names Nokturnal Mortum, Kroda, Drudkh, and Hate Forest as constituting "one of the most acclaimed NSBM scene in the world." However, a Sputnikmusic staff reviewer says that the band's label as NSBM is incorrect. The band distances itself from "extreme political views," at least in it's only press release dealing with the matter. Karl Spracklen in the article "True Aryan Black Metal" is neutral, commenting that "Drudkh are a Ukrainian pagan BM band, whose key members were also musicians in Hate Forest, a NSBM band" and "even if Drudkh are not National Socialist, they have fans who are." (90-91, 105-106 in the PDF nav bar) However, there's another article by Spracklen, "Leisure, Consumption and a Blaze in the Northern Sky: Developing an Understanding of Leisure at the End of Modernity through the Habermasian Framework of Communicative and Instrumental Rationality, which I cannot access, but which in my Google search brings up a quote "I'm not white but I can still appreciate lots of great NSBM from some awesome bands such as Burzum, Graveland, Drudkh, Kristallnacht and.." As I cannot read the article, I cannot tell whom Spracklen is quoting. My point is, some sources indicate that Drudkh is NSBM, while others say that Drudkh is not NSBM, and some consider it possible but make no clear-cut determination. The band itself never explicitly said that it isn't NSBM, which is telling, but claimed that it is not associated with extreme views.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   |  See what I have done  ) 22:09, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Varg Vikernes
Varg Vikernes of Burzum likewise called Adolf Hitler a warrior of the Asgardsrei.[28]

Source not found, so it is an unverified atribution, must be removed.
 * It is verified, but the link is dead. However, because it was verified, I was able to find an archive link.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   |  See what I have done  ) 05:29, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Original source is still available on the Burzum.com website, but at a different url. I am, however, concerned that the information that we have included in the article is a WP:CHERRYPICK from that source. Vikernes mentions both Hitler and Stalin by name, and Kings and Earls (Counts), warriors and other noble men, but also of thieves and murderers, criminals and bandits generally; it would seem misleading for us to include only the Hitler mention. Given that Vikernes is a living person, I will remove the sentence pending discussion & consensus here. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 00:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

List of artists
Fellow editors, We currently have a List of artists section containing both notable (Wikipedia article exists) and non-notable (no Wikipedia article exists) artists. In accordance with the discussion Famous bands above, and WP:NOTDIRECTORY, I suggest we amend this to List of notable artists or similar; removing the non-notable artists. Thoughts? - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 00:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think we need to have "notable" in the list title - just remove entries that do not have citations.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   |  See what I have done  ) 02:04, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 01:30, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I've updated the list, with sources. All entries must have citations, and if a band is cited please discuss on talk before removing. I understand that this list has serious political ramifications, both for listing and removing. We MUST rely on independent sources.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done ) 04:27, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Addition of Navbox - Skinhead
Fellow editors, the Skinhead Navbox had been added to the article. I have AGF reverted this, with the reasoning Rv AGF; while there is the obvious indirect link via National Socialism, not seeing a direct link to "Skinhead". I do not believe that there is sufficient direct link to warrant inclusion of NSBM in the Skinhead Navbox, nor the addition of the Navbox to this article. Thoughts? - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 05:17, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Darkened Nocturn Slaughtercult
I've read the DNS interview and I don't see them saying they share "certain views of NSBM". They seem to reject the ideology and speak against ideas regarding the value of human beings being defined by their race, nationality and gender. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.169.73.114 (talk) 22:39, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

 * I share the IP's concerns. The "certains views" quote is not found in the source; and the interview clearly does not support linking the band with NSBM. I will remove the section. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 23:07, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on National Socialist black metal. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927131014/http://www.maelstrom.nu/ezine/interview_iss50_224.php to http://www.maelstrom.nu/ezine/interview_iss50_224.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090422024415/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.Net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=93004 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.Net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=93004
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130311135742/http://thuleanperspective.com/2013/03/07/how-to-revolt-in-practise-ii/ to http://thuleanperspective.com/2013/03/07/how-to-revolt-in-practise-ii/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101002121928/http://thydoom.com/en/interviews/6.html to http://thydoom.com/en/interviews/6.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111121222135/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=107859 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=107859
 * Added tag to http://www.gorgoroth.com.pl/english/art-interview_with_gaahl_from_polish_holocaust_magazine_1995
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080208184453/http://www.decibelmagazine.com/features/may2006/nsbm.aspx to http://www.decibelmagazine.com/features/may2006/nsbm.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120630125512/http://www.summoning.info/Stuff/PoliticalStatements.html to http://www.summoning.info/Stuff/PoliticalStatements.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081024002551/http://www.globaldomination.se/interviews/watain-erik-danielsson to http://www.globaldomination.se/interviews/watain-erik-danielsson

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:17, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Disputed bands
There should be a separate section for bands like Drudkh and Burzum, which although a few sources (which i find questionable, but beside the point) try to claim are NSBM, have no NS content in their lyrics, and indeed, even have sources that say they are not NSBM. Stop lumping these in with the main list. 24.138.186.41 (talk) 13:18, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The article is very clear that projects by artists who have neo-Nazi or fascist views, but whose views aren't explicit in the music (although the themes are present), are still often labeled NSBM by outside analysts. This is essentially the same type of debate that you have with many Christian music genres such as Christian rock and metal and Christian hip hop - do the personal beliefs of the artists qualify them as performing the genre, or do those beliefs need to be explicit in the lyrics? With most of the NS-associated artists here, their music is still thematically NS even if not explicit (especially with Burzum), and most are involved in the NSBM scene. In one case, you deleted an artist who admitted that their band was NSBM but isn't anymore, even though there was a note explaining this.
 * If you believe a specific source is questionable, you can discuss it here on the talk page or take it to the reliable sources noticeboard. Please note that many entries have clarifying notes regarding the artists in question.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done ) 17:56, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Inaccuracy regarding Burzum/Varg Vikernes
There is a section that says:

“The emergence of NSBM coincided with the rise of the early Norwegian black metal scene in the early 1990s, particularly through the band Burzum, whose sole member, Varg Vikernes, developed his anti-Christian beliefs into an increasingly white nationalist and neo-Nazi form of Heathenry.”

Burzum has never been associated with NSBM as it is defined within this very article above the quoted portion. Simply having certain beliefs does not make a band NSBM. You will not find any serious Black Metal fan who would say this, and no other history of the genre describes Burzum as NSBM. This should be removed from the article altogether. 2601:248:601:7270:B51E:7E66:EBAB:A75D (talk) 22:23, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

White supremacist?
NSBM is not only limited to the European countries. There are NSBM bands from several Latin American countries with both National So ocialithemes and the Native American mythology (f.e. Nexcoyotl), there are a lot of NSBM bands from Asian countries like Vietnamese Vothana, Iranian Ātesh, Azerbaijani Nifret ifrət and several Turkish bands, Indian Dressed in Streams, Aghor Andhkar, Malaysian Barthafah belonging to broader Darah & Maruah scene, Chinese Aglare Light, Singaporean Qhafir even there are a Arab NSBM bands like the Emirati Blaspherion or Morroccan Eternal Krieg. There is even the Ethiopian NSBM band ደም (Blood and Glory) or the Black nationalist NSBM band Darkskin and another bands from the other countries. So the description should be that NSBM has an ethnic supremacist theme rather than the exclusively white supremacist.እና ክብርደም እና ክብርNifrətĀteshĀteshst 91.230.98.220 (talk) 06:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:National Socialist black metal


text:
Solitude Aeturnus

Solitude Aeturnus is an American epic doom metal band from Arlington, Texas. Founded by John Perez in early 1987, the original lineup consisted of Perez on guitar, vocalist Kristoff (Christopher) Gabehart, guitarist Tom Martinez, drummer Brad Kane, and Chris Hardin on bass. The name Solitude (later changed to Solitude Aeturnus) was chosen to pay homage to the bands Black Sabbath and Candlemass, both of whom had songs bearing the name "Solitude". Solitude Aeturnus released their debut album "Into the Depths of Sorrow" in 1991 with John Perez and Edgar Rivera on guitars, Robert Lowe on vocals, Lyle Steadham on bass and John Covington on drums. Solitude Aeturnus played with Candlemass in Texas in 1991. Their second and most progressive album "Beyond the Crimson Horizon" was released in 1992. "Through the Darkest Hour" the band's landmark album was released in 1994. "Downfall" the band's 4th studio album was released in 1996. "Adagio" which was released two years later in 1998 featured Steve Moseley on bass who replaced Lyle Steadham. Lyle Steadham was the main lyricist of the band until then. The band's final album "Alone" was released in 2006 once again with a different line up as James Martin took over bass duties, Steve Moseley moved to lead guitar replacing Edgar Rivera and Steve Nichols replaced John Covington on drums. Following a few concerts in Europe, Solitude Aeturnus went into a long hiatus as singer Robert Lowe took over singing duties in Candlemass.

Their vocalist, Robert Lowe, was also the singer for the doom metal band Candlemass between 2007 and 2012. Former drummer and bassist Lyle Steadham is now guitarist and lead vocalist for the band Ghoultown.

Biography
Formed in early 1987, the line up began as John Perez, quit his former seminal thrash metal band Rotting Corpse in early 1987. Perez, already a veteran in the metal scene, had begun to tire of the limitations of thrash and sought a new sound. Already a long time follower of the early 1980s classic doom groups like Witchfinder General, St. Vitus, Black Hole, Nemesis and the like, Perez decided to adopt a doom metal sound. Perez assembled a group of musicians over the next year namely; Brad Kane - drums (another member of the early 1980s thrash scene), Kris Gabehardt - vocals (previously with Satanic death metal band Death Tripper), Tom Martinez - guitar and Chris Hardin - bass. After writing songs and rehearsing up until December 1987, the band entered the studio in January 1988 to record their five song demo entitled "And Justice For All...". This title and demo preceded the Metallica album of the same name by some seven months. The band's name at this time was Solitude. It was two years later that the band were forced to change the name to Solitude Aeturnus.

After the release of the demo, various gigs around the local area followed. The response was lukewarm at best, since no one around the area knew what to think of the band. In late 1988, changes started to occur within the band, finally settling on a line up that consisted of Perez - guitars, Edgar Rivera - guitars, Robert Lowe - vocals, Lyle Steadham on bass and John "Wolf" Covington on drums. This line up lasted for the next seven years until 1996. Lyle Steadham joined the band on drums while Chris Hardin was still on bass. This particular line up recorded the second official demo of the band containing two tracks, "Mirror of Sorrow" and "Opaque Divinity". Lyle then moved over to bass duties as Hardin left the band and Covington joined.

This two song tape caught the attention of the independent label King Klassic. The band entered the Dallas Sound Lab in January 1990 to record their debut album, Into the Depths of Sorrow. The whole album was recorded for a sum of $3000 and done in seven days including the remix. Shortly after the album was delivered it suffered a delay due to King Klassic not having the money to put it out. After some shopping around the album eventually caught the attention of Roadrunner Records and a licensed deal followed by Solitude Aeturnus signing directly to Roadrunner followed. After numerous other delays the album finally saw the light of day in July 1991 a full year and half after the album was recorded. No tours followed although by this time the band had already written enough songs for a second album. In March 1992, the band entered Sound Logic recording studios to begin the sessions for the second album, Beyond the Crimson Horizon. The budget for this album was much greater and as a result the sound was improved. The album was released in July 1992 and eventually a US tour was set up in late November with Paul Di'Anno's Killers. The tour lasted six weeks and was a success for the band. Shortly after, in February 1993, the band were dropped from Roadrunner. This came as a relief for the band as the proper support from Roadrunner never came their way. In December the band finally signed a new recording contract with up and coming label, Pavement Records.

The band decided to get away from their familiar surroundings and took off for England to record their third album, Through the Darkest Hour. Recorded in late March 1994 at Rhythm Studios, this showed a simpler and heavier direction.

Through the Darkest Hour received critical acclaim across the globe upon its release in August 1994. After a few months of negotiating, the band went on the road with Mercyful Fate for an extensive US tour. The tour lasted six weeks and shortly after the band embarked on their first tour of Europe with fellow doom band Revelation. After this tour the band went through a long break that would last until April 1996 when recording for the next album commenced. During this time Perez started his own Brainticket Records label as well as recording a solo album under the name of The Liquid Sound Company. The next album, Downfall was recorded in Dallas, Texas, and despite receiving praise once again for their efforts, the band were extremely dissatisfied with the end product. The songs suffered due to the production quality of the album being poor. After years of hard knocks and never ending struggles the band underwent their first (and only) major line up change.

Lyle Steadham left the band shortly after the recording of Downfall. Primarily because he was tired of the group's sound and eventually formed punk band the Killcreeps. The band continued on enlisting the services of Teri Pritchard in as temporary bassist. It was this line up that toured Europe in April 1996 with Swedish power metal band Morgana Lafey. Another unintentional break followed and a split from Pavement Records eventually occurred. During this time new bass player, Steve Moseley, a long time friend and fan of the band replaced Lyle. The band then signed on to German label Massacre Records in December 1997 and recorded what was to become their masterpiece, Adagio. This time going back to Rhythm Studios in England the album was recorded in March 1998 and released in June of the same year. The band toured Europe in September 1998 with Savior Machine in support of the record. Adagio finally saw a U.S. release in January 1999 through Olympic Records. Being distributed through Polygram, the Olympic deal gave the band even greater exposure in the native country.

The band went on hiatus in 2011, but reunited in 2023 when they announced they would be playing at the Hell's Heroes festival in March of 2024.

Members

 * Current members
 * Robert Lowe – lead vocals (1988–2011, 2023–present)
 * John Perez – guitars (1987–2011, 2023–present)
 * Edgar Rivera – guitars (1988–1998, 2023–present)
 * Steve Moseley - bass (1998–2004), guitars ( 2004–2011, 2023–present )
 * Lyle Steadham – bass (1990–1996, 2023–present), drums (1988–1989)
 * John Covington – drums (1990–2005, 2023–present)

 * Former members
 * Kris Gabehart – vocals (1987–1988)
 * Tom Martinez – guitar (1987–1988)
 * Brad Kane – drums (1987–1988)
 * Chris Hardin – bass (1987–1989)
 * Teri Pritchard – bass (1997)
 * Kurt Joye – bass (2004–2005)
 * James Martin – bass (2005–2011)
 * Steve Nichols – drums (2005–2011)

 * Timeline

Studio albums

 * Into the Depths of Sorrow (1991) (Reissued and expanded by Massacre records November 2006)
 * Beyond the Crimson Horizon (1992) (Reissued and expanded by Massacre records November 2006)
 * Through the Darkest Hour (1994)
 * Downfall (1996)
 * Adagio (1998)
 * Alone (2006)

Other releases

 * And Justice for All... (demo, 1988)
 * Demo 89 (1989)
 * Days of Doom (1994) (VHS tape featuring rare and unreleased performances and studio footage of the recording of their first three albums)
 * Hour of Despair (DVD, 2007)
 * In Times of Solitude (compilation, 2011)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Solitude Aeturnus


text:
User talk:Sandybates

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Feco
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Creating Articles w/ Categories
Good work creating new articles. When you create things, it helps tremendously to assign them to an accurate category (see WP:CG for info). If you're really not sure about categories, at least assign your new articles a stub category (see WP:SC for info). By assigning a category, you help make sure your new articles don't get lost as 'orphans' that are not associated with related topics. Feco

title: User talk:Sandybates


text:
It's Not Funny

It's Not Funny is David Cross' 2004 stand-up comedy album, released on Sub Pop Records. The track titles, like those on his previous record Shut Up You Fucking Baby!, have no relevance to the bits Cross does on the album and are instead there to make fun of material performed by other comedians, either on the whole or targeted at specific comedians. Cross has said the album's title references children being laughed at by their friends while trying to tell them something important, only to reply, "Come on guys, it's not funny." The album was released on CD by indie-rock label Sub Pop, and on vinyl by comedy label Stand Up! Records, which issued a limited LP edition of 500 for this release, as they had for Shut Up You Fucking Baby!. Like the CD, it also contains a hidden track that plays from the label out to a locked groove. This edition is a single LP, unlike its predecessor.

Track listing

 * 1) Certain Leaders in Government Look or Act like Certain Pop Culture References! – 4:51
 * 2) Women, Please Rinse Off Your Vagina and Anus! – 5:10
 * 3) I've Taken a Popular Contemporary Pop Song and Changed the Lyrics to Comment on the Proliferation of Starbucks in My Neighborhood! – 3:16
 * 4) A Rapid Series of Comical Noises! – 3:57
 * 5) Although Indigent, Rural Families Have Little to Say in the Matter, Third Rate Public Education Has Kept Them Ignorant and Thus, Great Sources of Ridicule! – 2:48
 * 6) My Child is Enthralling, Especially When It Says Something Unexpectedly Precocious Even Though It Doesn't Understand What It Just Said! – 8:38
 * 7) My Immigrant Mom Talks Funny! – 13:37
 * 8) When It Comes to Jews, Behavior One Might Perceive as Obnoxious and Annoying I Present as 'Quirky' but It's Okay to Joke About It Because I, Myself, Am Jewish! – 6:01
 * 9) Pandering to the Locals! – 7:13
 * 10) Even Though I Am in the Closet, That Won't Prevent Me from Getting Cheap Laughs at the Expense of Homosexuals! – 2:37
 * 11) Weathermen Have Become, for the Most Part, Obsolete! – 2:53
 * 12) When All is Said and Done, I am Lonely and Miserable and Barely Able to Mask My Contempt for the Audience as I Trot Out the Same Sorry Act I've Been Doing Since the Mid-Eighties! – 12:51
 * 13) *Contains a hidden track after a period of silence with an additional comedy routine about then-former Creed vocalist Scott Stapp, and awkwardly meeting him on Celebrity Poker Showdown (he says in track 2 he would "rather hear the death rattle of [his] only child" than listen to Creed.)

title: It's Not Funny


text:
Talk:Civil rights movement (1896–1954)

NPOV
The Garveyite movement was "contradictory" and consisted of "defeatism"? I think that's a little too biased of a description. How can having a revolutionist mindset in the context of separatist context constitute "defeatism". Far too many people place an emphasis on Marcus Garvey's "back to Africa" aspects, but Garvey wasn't proposing that African Americans simply give up and return to Africa. Rather, like Malcolm X, he was proposing economic independence. In fact, Garvey loved Haiti and Jamaica, as he felt these were areas where blacks could take over and successfully achieve pure independence from the white man, outside of apartheid and Jim Crow. In many ways, his ideas were more activist and revolutionary than that of Martin Luther King Jr.'s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.196.86.161 (talk) 11:08, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've removed the POV template as this discussion appears to be dormant, per the instructions on that template's page:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
 * If editors are continuing to work toward resolution of any issue and I missed it, however, please feel free to restore. I'm not expert enough to judge whether the article's claims about Garvey are accurate or not, but you're welcome to reword it following a reliable source. For now I've added a citation needed tag. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:African-American Civil Rights Movement (1954–68) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on African-American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080402060131/http://texaspolitics.laits.utexas.edu:80/html/vce/0503.html to http://texaspolitics.laits.utexas.edu/html/vce/0503.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:31, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Move or merge proposal
I am proposing to merge this article to Jim Crow Era. That term is the closest WP:COMMONNAME to denote this period of time. Nor, does that period limit itself solely to the experiences of African Americans. I am also proposing to merge Nadir of American race relations, Disenfranchisement after the Reconstruction Era, and Jim Crow laws to Jim Crow Era. See |Jim_Crow_laws|Disenfranchisement_after_the_Reconstruction_Era|Nadir_of_American_race_relations Pageviews Analysis from 10/2/2015 to 3/11/2016 of the four terms. Mitchumch (talk) 06:40, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

ADDENDUM: African-American Civil Rights Movement (1865–95) is also being proposed to merge into Reconstruction Era and Jim Crow Era. For a separate discussion on that merge, please see Talk:African-American Civil Rights Movement (1865–95). Mitchumch (talk) 03:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I would support a merger of all the articles mentioned except for this one. A "Jim Crow era" article combining the information from the nadir, disenfranchisement and Jim Crow laws articles would serve a useful and logical purpose in describing the situation as it was – the problems with implementing and maintaining Reconstruction, the the white backlash against it, federal ambivalence post-Grant, and so on. It should also make clear that the "nadir," while it is not precisely dated, is generally agreed to have been somewhere in the first quarter of the 20th century, and that conditions therefore began to improve, albeit on a small scale, decades before the Jim Crow era ended. Such an article would be complex and coherent enough to stand on its own, and would become unnecessarily convoluted by the addition of this article, as well.
 * I propose that a "Jim Crow era" article should report attitudes, laws, social conditions and government policies between the Plessy decision and (perhaps) the legal integration of Southern universities in the mid-1960s. The endpoint of the "Jim Crow era" article, if not the integration of these universities, should at least be some time after the Brown decision, to highlight that legal segregation remained enforced in many areas and establishments after Brown. Meanwhile, this article should remain in place to report the efforts of African Americans and their allies to change the attitudes, laws, conditions and policies reported by the Jim Crow article. There would of course be some overlap of content between the two, but not enough to justify a full merge in my opinion. This article should also keep to its current, shorter timeframe (ending with Brown), partly because the Brown decision had an immediate and significant impact on the nature and scale of Civil Rights efforts, but did not immediately end the Jim Crow era, and partly for the sake of consistency and continuity with the other two "period" articles on the African American Civil Rights movement (1865–95 and 1954–68). The tail-end of the "Jim Crow era" article would therefore correspond to the African-American Civil Rights Movement (1954–68) article, rather than to this one.
 * A hatnote link to this article from "Jim Crow era" (and vice versa) would satisfy me as far as WP:COMMONNAME and pageviews go. InVerrem (talk) 21:07, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The five articles violate WP:Content forking.

 * Secondly, the beginning, low point, ending, and content of the Jim Crow Era article should be determined by the scholarly and academic community and the literature they have produced. According to this body of literature, all of the content from the five aforementioned existing articles fall directly into the topic of Jim Crow Era.  If you can cite scholarly or academic sources to support the timeline and content parameters you've established, then those sources can be incorporated into the new article.

 * Also, please see "ADDENDUM" immediately beneath my proposal statement. I have placed a Template:Merge on the African-American Civil Rights Movement (1865–95) article, because there is virtually no content in that article despite being created on 8 October 2009.  I had forgotten to add Template:Merge on the destination article(s) for the 1865–95 article.  Secondly, there is no scholarly basis for the current naming of the 1865–95 article nor for the 1896–1954 article.  The WP:COMMONNAME as used by the scholarly and academic community for the 1865–95 period is Reconstruction and Jim Crow.  Mitchumch (talk) 03:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Is the proposal on the table to merge four articles (Nadir of American race relations, Disenfranchisement after the Reconstruction Era, Jim Crow laws, and African-American Civil Rights Movement (1865–95)) into a single new article called Jim Crow Era? This is unclear to me because African-American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954) is also marked as a possible merge into Jim Crow Era.

 * This proposal seems ill-advised to me. There's considerable overlap among these four (or five) articles and of course they all need work.  But taken together they don't form any nice clear shape.  In "Nadir", the introduction indicates a scope of racial conflict in former-CSA states between 1877 and "early 20th century".  The scope of "Disenfranchisement" is specifically voting laws, in former CSA states, from 1877 to the 1965 Voting Rights Act.  The scope of "Jim Crow laws" is specifically segregation law, in former CSA states, from 1877 to 1965.  The two "African-American Civil Rights Movement" articles are focused on those efforts, in those time periods, with a national scope.

 * Will the resulting single merged article contain all of the above, namely, racial conflict, disenfranchisement, segregation, and the black civil rights effort in the entire U.S. from 1877 to 1965? Wow.  That'll be big!  That scope would even include the wholesale murder of Chinese immigrants in the west, and the Detroit race riot of 1943.  I would not expect those to be addressed in an article called "Jim Crow Era".  IMO that proposed scope is way too ambitious.

 * Looking at this for a few minutes, I think this proposed five-banger merge is not the best idea, and there's one sick man in the bunch: Nadir of American race relations.  The content there certainly belongs in wikipedia, somewhere.  But "Nadir" is ill-defined geographically and in time span, it addresses only black-white relations, it wanders, and its very title suggests some kind of objectivity in measurement.  I propose that we leave the other fairly well-defined articles as they are, and concentrate on what "Nadir" contains and where that material actually belongs.  Lockley (talk) 09:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

 * "Is the proposal on the table to merge four articles[?]" It's five articles.

 * "taken together they don't form any nice clear shape." and "Will the resulting single merged article contain all of the above, namely" The scope of the article is determined by the literature produced by the scholarly and academic community about Jim Crow. It is what it is.  Even if that means the article is large.  But, size is not the determining factor.  It's the reliable sources that determine the scope of the proposed article.

 * "Will the resulting single merged article contain all of the above, namely, racial conflict, disenfranchisement, segregation, and the black civil rights effort in the entire U.S. from 1877 to 1965?" Content from the five articles that belong to the Reconstruction Era (1863-1877) or Civil Rights Movement (1954-1968, or earlier) will be merged with those respective articles. It all depends on reliable sources.

 * "I would not expect those to be addressed in an article called "Jim Crow Era"" As for the Rock Springs massacre and Detroit race riot of 1943. If the literature says it is part of Jim Crow, then yes.  If the literature says it is not, then no.  What ever the literature says - that's it.  Check out WorldCat, Google Books, and Google Scholar to see scope of literature on Jim Crow.

 * "I think this proposed five-banger merge is not the best idea" At best, perhaps the existing articles could become WP:CONTENTFORK - subsections of a larger article. But the overlap in content is too extensive, not minor, and can't be ignored.

 * "I propose that we leave the other fairly well-defined articles as they are" -  It would be different if one article dealt solely with suffrage rights, another dealt solely with racial segregation and miscegenation, and another with housing, employment, and education discrimination.  But, they cover the same stuff with differences in time periods.  To let those articles stand as is would be a violation of WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONTENTFORK - multiple separate articles all treating the same subject.  Mitchumch (talk) 11:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME is irrelevant to this conversation. Jim Crow era refers to a period of time; this article is about a movement that occurred within this era. Lockley is clearly on point in all of his arguments. These articles may have overlap, but the solution is not to eliminate the articles in favor of some unwritten article. The first thing to do is write the Jim Crow Era article. I'm guessing, based on the material already available in the proposed deleted articles, that this is going to be a pretty good sized article. Those sections in the new article which overlap with these existing articles should be written as summaries of these articles (see Summary style).

I'm also curious why you picked these particular articles to eliminate. For example, a key player in this whole era, as it relates to race, is the Ku Klux Klan. Why eliminate an article dedicated to the Civil Rights movement while keeping an article about this racist, violent organization? Or why not, going in the direction you seem to favor, eliminate all the topics found at the template "African American topics"? Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 17:51, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I just saw this post. I think there is a major misunderstanding here. So, let me address each of your concerns.

 * "this article is about a movement that occurred within this era"
 * The term "Civil Rights Movement" denotes a specific event. For example, the American Revolution is a specific event.  To create three articles American Revolution (1775-1788), American Revolution (1789-1865), and American Revolution (1866-1968) would violate WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH and WP:COMMONNAME.  I'm not sure why this issue has occurred with the term Civil Rights Movement on Wikipedia, but it's the same scenario.  The "Civil Rights Movement" term, like "American Revolution", is not a generic term like "Political history of African Americans in the United States" or "Reconstruction Era and African Americans".  The time period for the "Civil Rights Movement" is traditionally 1954-1968.  Newer studies are challenging this period.  However, the earliest time suggested by these newer studies is during the 1930's, not 1896.

 * first thing to do is write the Jim Crow Era article."

 * I don't have a problem with producing a merged Jim Crow Era article to show everyone as a demonstration of my ideas more clearly. Actually, I think that would help address a lot of trepidation.  I can place it in a sandbox for everyone to review.

 * "the solution is not to eliminate the articles in favor of some unwritten article." and To your last paragraph
 * I do NOT, repeat, do NOT want to delete/eliminate/dispose of any content from any of the five articles. I want to WP:MERGE them into an article with more information and better structure.  The templates are requests to merge articles.  If you look at my edits, then you will see I spend a lot of my time ADDING CONTENT to African American political history articles.  I don't understand why you would think I would destroy this content.  Mitchumch (talk) 19:37, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Bottom line -- your proposal eliminates articles from wikipedia that deal specifically with issues relating to African American history. Whether or not all of the material is placed somewhere else, the reader interested in African American history will need to navigate their way through a giant article that has much besides African American history.  Call it a merge, but the fact is that your proposal deletes articles about subjects that are covered concisely  in thousands of scholarly books and journal articles (regardless of the names given to the articles).  You can still write your giant article (I'm playing with it a little at User:North Shoreman/Sandbox2) -- once it's written then we can decide, using summary style guidelines, the scope of the various articles. My suggestion regarding this article would be to incorporate a slightly expanded version of the lead into the giant article with a hatnote reference from the giant article back to this article. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 23:38, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

 * OPPOSE I am opposed for the primary reason that covers far too much territory. Another major factor: the suite of articles on the African-American civil rights movement have a common thread, of how the blacks managed to work together to build political, intellectual, educational, religious, cultural, and economic forces that eventually won victories in the federal courts in the 1940s and 50s, culminating and national success in public opinion and Congress in the 1960s.  In sharp contrast, "Jim Crow" is a very different story it is about the militant White supremacists who organize political power to completely exclude and humiliate blacks. Trying to provide fair and impartial coverage to such bitter opponents would be a difficult challenge for the editors, and I think would not satisfy readers.  As it stands, the civil rights movement articles are about black agency and how they managed to succeed after a century of trying--It's a unified coherent story that is broken up into sub-articles because it is so long and complex and detailed, and has been the target of the huge amount of scholarly literature in recent decades.  Rjensen (talk) 04:30, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

 * In regards to the article covering too much territory. So does the article on History of the United States.  Size is not an issue here.

 * In regards to the remainder of your statement. Every issue and concern that you've mentioned here are present in the articles on the Reconstruction Era or Civil Rights Movement.  Yet, those articles stand as single articles.  Articles about conflict are common on Wikipedia.  This is just another article about conflict. Mitchumch (talk) 19:43, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Question What would be the geographic scope of the proposed new article? Its title is in reference to the Jim Crow laws, but they were largely in effect in the Southern United States. That does not mean that other forms of segregation, institutional racism, and race-motivated violence were absent in the rest of the country. Dimadick (talk) 16:30, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The scope of Jim Crow Era article would cover the entire United States. Your assessment mirrors the literature on the period.  Mitchumch (talk) 17:28, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Then the idea of a co-ordinated article on the era might be necessary, though it would probably need sub-articles to cover specific aspects. I'd suggest that it should also be a part of the History of the United States and its sub-articles. History of the United States (1865–1918), for example, is missing information of the race relations aspect of the era. Dimadick (talk) 17:39, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree completely. Mitchumch (talk) 17:42, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

counterproposal
, this is a good discussion. I don't think your merge proposal is going to make it. It would be a shame to walk away from what we've discovered here. So I have a counterproposal which, I think, addresses the concerns that you started with.

Let's establish United States race relations (1865-1876), United States race relations (1877-1895), United States race relations (1896-1954), and United States race relations (1954-2007). And merge the five existing articles you named into those targets. The scope of these new articles would be national. We would leave Reconstruction Era as it is, with its focus on the south, covering everything about that era not directly related to race relations.

I believe the phrase "race relations" is neutral, encyclopedia, and would emcompass de jure discrimination, important racial incidents, social standing, etc., for African-Americans AND Asians, Hispanics, American Indians, everybody. We've discussed the overlaps in this whole area but we haven't even mentioned some of the large gaps. (The treatment of Chinese on the west coast, the deliberate coordination of the southern states to overturn Reconstruction, etc.) I think this scheme would be a good top-down way to provide a framework for that. This scheme would address 's (and my) concerns about the size and scope of the resulting articles. Tell me what you think. All best. Lockley (talk) 21:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- we have a large number of articles dealing with Indian Americans, Chinese-Americans, Japanese-Americans, etc that all get merged in there too. All sorts of topics on the concept of race, eugenics, the history of anthropology, racial segregation, White supremacy,, images of minorities in fiction & film & painting, college admissions, etc. etc. get rolled in together.  The African-American story has coherence and a very large bibliography of reliable sources. Race relations is a grab bag of themes. Rjensen (talk) 22:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Oppose -- For the reasons cited by Rjensen. Plus, since you've expanded this all the way to 2007, I assume you would also want to eliminate African-American Civil Rights Movement (1954–68), denying an article on wikipedia to one of the most significant events in U.S. history. Also the dates of your proposed articles are significant to African American history but largely irrelevant to racial relationships involving other groups. Which (or how many) of the new articles to you merge Anti-Chinese sentiment in the United States? How about Cultural assimilation of Native Americans?  How does the 142,000 byte article Racism in the United States fit into the grand plan. I'm just not sure what existing problem any of this discussion actually solves -- especially since we're talking about merging with non-existent articles. It seems like a large number of readers (my guess is the majority) interested in any of this content would prefer articles targeted to specific groups.

 * BTW, there is an article (Redeemers) that addresses the southern effort to reverse Reconstruction advances; I assume this would be eliminated. Also Dixiecrat would have to go along with Ku Klux Klan -- or do we just merge out of existence primarily African American articles? Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 23:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Oppose -- I am surprised that you suggested this counterproposal.  You said "IMO that proposed scope is way too ambitious" and "proposed five-way pileup is not the best answer" when I wanted to merge content into a Jim Crow Era article.  Your proposal:
 * Creates four new articles, not one
 * Eliminates the Jim Crow Era entirely and NOT retain a well established topic with abundant scholarly sources
 * Expands scope from Jim Crow Era to the intersection of race and impact upon all populations in the United States
 * Your proposal dwarfs my original proposal in scope.
 * Having said that, I am not opposed to the core principal of your counter proposal - The idea of race and racism impacted people beyond African Americans. However, you left out Europeans or whites.  Think National Origins Formula and Emergency Quota Act.  Also, the history of racism is NOT solely a history of injury and the injured, but also a history of deliberate benefit and the beneficiaries.

 * tough crowd (adjusts necktie) Lockley (talk) 08:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I'm sure it's a nice tie, though. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 18:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

2nd counterproposal
Since everyone is opposed to both proposals, then here is a counterproposal. Mitchumch (talk) 07:31, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * A MOCK-UP of the proposed Jim Crow Era will be produced at User:North Shoreman/Sandbox2
 * The mock-up will ONLY merge all or pertinent content from the original target five articles
 * All five articles will remain UNCHANGED
 * After Jim Crow Era mock-up has merged the five target articles, then we can REEVALUATE the original proposal
 * Create STUB ARTICLE of History of race in the United States
 * Oppose nobody likes the basic idea and we're wasting all our time. there never was a thought out rationale for doing any of this.  Rjensen (talk) 07:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Oppose -- I am experimenting in my sandbox, but have already determined that an adequate article titled Jim Crow Era needs to go way beyond the five articles. The is no point trying to fit all of the info from the five articles into the new article since it would be much simpler to retain those articles and include summaries of the articles in the new article.  I don't think it's possible to write an article incorporating all of the material from the five articles while adding new material that would come in under 250,000 bytes. I do think a reasonable sized article relying heavily on summary style could be a valuable addition to wikipedia, but this is not the forum to discuss it. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 18:27, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Oppose --I oppose the original proposals and this second counter-proposal, largely for the reasons that Rjensen and North Shoreman have described above. These articles deal with specific, complex topics that deserve to be covered in depth. Merging them would result in the loss of too much material, or make an article too large and complex to navigate. It's difficult enough to get the facts covered in separate articles. For instance, there are too many articles about politics and politicians in the South that gloss over the decades of disenfranchisement. I don't want to see the issues buried in a general Jim Crow article.Parkwells (talk) 15:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm not going to pretend to have read this entire page, but fwiw I think we need to have a separate article that specifically explains what people mean by the "nadir" of black history. It's a phrase that comes up a lot. Rosekelleher (talk) 16:41, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Have you seen the article Nadir of American race relations? For what it's worth, Eric Foner has stated that the "nadir" of African American history wasn't Jim Crow, but slavery.  Mitchumch (talk) 16:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I just skimmed this discussion, and it seems that this proposal is defeated, so I'm going to remove the tag from the article. I hope that doesn't violate some protocol. Klortho (talk) 04:11, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, let me clarify -- I removed the merge tag from Jim Crow laws. I hadn't realized that this discussion was on a different page, and I don't presume to know whether or not there are still outstanding issues WRT other pages. Klortho (talk) 02:35, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I placed the merge templates on several articles. Please feel free to remove them.  It appears the discussion is over.  Thanks for the concern.  Mitchumch (talk) 03:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on African-American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954). 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080402060131/http://texaspolitics.laits.utexas.edu/html/vce/0503.html to http://texaspolitics.laits.utexas.edu/html/vce/0503.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:39, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:African-American Civil Rights Movement (1954–1968) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:16, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Lots of problems; rewrite needed
Old, old sources that are not just out of date but represent a historical POV that is either fringe, incorrect, or just wrong. The idea that communists were responsible for the civil rights wins is just one example, and this is an old JBS/evangelical Christian canard that should be removed. Viriditas (talk) 01:59, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

What is meant by civil society protest 160.119.221.2 (talk) 12:12, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Civil rights movement (1896–1954)


text: User:Jammydodger/tables

title: User:Jammydodger/tables


text:
Youngstown SteelHounds

The Youngstown SteelHounds was a professional ice hockey team which participated in the Central Hockey League (CHL) from the 2005–2006 season through the 2007–2008 season. The team was affiliated with the Columbus Blue Jackets of the NHL and the Syracuse Crunch of the AHL. The team played its home games at the Covelli Centre in Youngstown, Ohio.

The SteelHounds franchise was owned by Herb Washington. The last to hold the posts of General Manager and Head Coach were Joe Gregory and Kevin Kaminski. After being expelled from the CHL following the 2007–2008 season, the team did not participate as a member of any league in 2008–2009.

Per a Youngstown Vindicator report, discussions were held with the ECHL about a potential return for professional hockey in Youngstown, however, in 2009 the Mahoning Valley Phantoms, a Junior A hockey team, moved from the NAHL to the USHL, the premier junior league in the United States, and are playing their entire home slate at the Covelli Centre under a new name, the Youngstown Phantoms.

Franchise history
The SteelHounds took their name from the U.S. steel industry.

The franchise joined the CHL in 2005 as an expansion team for the 2005–06 season, playing in the Northeast Division of the CHL, with the closest team to Youngstown being the Mississippi RiverKings.

The SteelHounds won their first home game at the Chevrolet Centre on November 4, 2005, when they defeated the Oklahoma City Blazers 4–3. They went on to finish second in the four-team Northeast Division with a 24–35 record. The SteelHounds failed to make the playoffs in their first season.

The 2006–07 season was a better one for the SteelHounds, as the team finished with 34 wins, 20 losses and 10 overtime losses. The SteelHounds made the playoffs for the first time in franchise history but lost in the first round to the Colorado Eagles.

The SteelHounds' best record in their short franchise history came in the 2007–08 season with 39 wins, 20 losses and 5 overtime losses. The team finished second in the Northeast Division and qualified for the playoffs for the second straight year, but lost again to the Colorado Eagles. After being kicked out of the CHL following the 2007–08 season, management considered joining the ECHL or the IHL.

Youngstown out of the CHL
As of June 2, 2008, the CHL announced that the SteelHounds franchise would not be playing in the league. The CHL cited the reason for termination being non-payment of league dues. The SteelHounds and the league have had a dispute related to travel expenses since the franchise began in 2006.

The SteelHounds explored joining the IHL or ECHL for the 2008–09 or 2009–10 season, as both leagues had teams located in the Great Lakes and Mid-Atlantic regions, making them a better fit for the SteelHounds than the CHL (most of whose teams are in the Southern Plains and Southwest regions of the United States). The team's ownership engaged in talks with the IHL, and in previous seasons the SteelHounds have had exhibition games against ECHL teams.

After being kicked out of the league, and failing to quickly find a new league to play in for the upcoming 2008–2009 season, there was a mass exodus of top officials in the SteelHounds organization. On June 23, 2008 General Manager Joe Gregory resigned his position, and announced that he was hired as an Executive Vice President for the Norfolk Admirals of the AHL. Then, Kevin Kaminski resigned his position as head coach on July 1, 2008, after which, on July 2, 2008, the rival Mississippi RiverKings announced him as their new head coach, signed to an unheard of three-year contract.

Franchise scoring leaders
These are the top-ten point-scorers in franchise history (*Includes post-season totals).

Note: Pos = Position; GP = Games played; G = Goals; A = Assists; Pts = Points; P/G = Points per game

title: Youngstown SteelHounds


text:
Talk:Horseshoes (game)

Horseshoes or Horseshoe
Do we really need two pages on this topic? Should this page be a redirct so that people get to the main article and just merge in any additional information from here? Vegaswikian 21:37, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * It probably should be restored to how it was: Horseshoe being the article about the items themselves and Horseshoes being about the game, but with a little disambig link notice at the top pointing to the main article. Horseshoes (game) (the name, not the content that is currently there) is unnecessary. DreamGuy 15:23, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

 * I've detailed the situation on Duplicate_articles. Sorry for the mixup. --Rossumcapek 21:08, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The history section has a weasel phrase that needs citation, although I'm not sure how to mark it as such: "Nonetheless, there is a theory that the camp followers of the Grecian armies, who could not afford the discus, took discarded horseshoes, set up a stake and began throwing horseshoes at it." Who's theory is this? Can we get a citation or have it deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.154.167.153 (talk) 19:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

This website
éThis website is coolƏ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.242.106 (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Second point
From the article, I cannot tell whether the second shoe has to be within six inches of the stake in order to qualify for a second point. (Obviously, it has to be closer to the stake than any shoe of the opponent.) — Q uantling (talk | contribs) 18:49, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

"Close only counts in horseshoes"
That's the quote, really? For over thirty years I've always heard it as "Close only counts in horseshoes and grenades" not merely just horseshoes. The one being about scoring in the game, the other being about the effectiveness of the weapon. - annonymous 4/9/2012 5:02 AM EST — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.64.5.105 (talk) 09:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades and brain surgery." 50.202.81.2 (talk) 02:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know about brain surgery, but the modern version is "close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and atom bombs". It's probably quite silly to even mention the saying.  But then, this article needs a lot more cleanup than that... Huw Powell (talk) 19:48, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

BOH Cup?
What's the BOH Cup? That section has existed citation-free since 2007, and Google finds no relevant hits. Rojomoke (talk) 13:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with the section being deleted. Ibadibam (talk) 22:08, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 16 November 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved (non-admin closure)  ‡ The Night Watch ω     (talk)   05:19, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Horseshoes → Horseshoes (game) – Moved without discussion all the way back in 2005. I'd recommend that Horseshoes be a primary redirect to Horseshoe. 162 etc. (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support BUT it shouldn't redirect right to Horseshoe. Instead, it should redirect to the dab page Horseshoe (disambiguation). Paintspot Infez (talk) 02:36, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support this.--Ortizesp (talk) 04:20, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support move not concerned about whether redirects to horseshoe or dab page. Possibly dab marginally preferable. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:06, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support and redirect to Horseshoes. Seems obvious, thanks 162 etc. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:25, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support and redirect to the Horseshoe DAB page. I think it's just as likely that someone searching for "horseshoes" on Wikipedia is looking for the game as opposed to the actual object. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:58, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support the game is clearly based on the object and the object has more views (10,308) than the game (2,539) the 1927 film has 17, the song has 15 and the 1923 film has 9|Horseshoes_(1923_film)|Horseshoes_(song)|Horseshoe|Horse_Shoes_(1927_film)] but the DAB may be better than a redirect to the object to avoid breaking external links pointing to the game.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Horseshoes (game)


text:
Neulainen Jerkunen

Neulainen Jerkunen (1994) is the debut album of the Finnish rock group Absoluuttinen Nollapiste.

Track listing

 * 1) "Takalaittomien määrä ja taajuus" (Tommi Liimatta) – 0:10
 * 2) "Lue tarina, osta puku, opi tanssi" (Liimatta) – 4:45
 * 3) "Matkustajakoti Lintukoto" (Liimatta) – 3:19
 * 4) "Kivoja kansioita" (Liimatta) – 4:33
 * 5) "Ääniaallot tappaa syövän" (Liimatta) – 1:09
 * 6) "Neulainen Jerkunen" (Liimatta) – 7:00
 * 7) "Laatikkohevonen" (Liimatta) – 2:29
 * 8) "Paikallinen nimikauhu tulee ellei maissi lopu" (Liimatta) – 4:51
 * 9) "Ehdokkaat" (Aake Otsala, Liimatta) – 2:52
 * 10) "Hallitsevien piirien vaatimukset" (Liimatta) – 3:46
 * 11) "Siibu diibu daps dimli damlix" (Otsala, Liimatta, Aki Lääkkölä, Tomi Krutsin) – 1:29
 * 12) "Syöt sen minkä jaksat" (Liimatta) – 7:19
 * 13) "Pimeässä vietetty aika minuuteissa" (Liimatta) – 5:40
 * 14) "Polki polveen katsos kiloheederle kaufen" (Liimatta) – 0:10
 * 15) "Rarmos ybrehtar" (Liimatta) – 2:35
 * 16) "Valtani viimeinen päivä" (Liimatta) – 10:17
 * 17) "Seuraudet, Baude" (Liimatta) – 1:08

Personnel

 * Tommi Liimatta - Vocals, Wind Instruments, Chiquita Guitar
 * Aki Lääkkölä - Guitars, Mandolin, Keyboards
 * Aake Otsala - Bass Guitar
 * Tomi Krutsin - Drums, Vocals

title: Neulainen Jerkunen