Talk:Kyuss

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

Question[edit]

Not really a question, but Kyuss Lives! is not Kyuss, just as the New Cars weren't the Cars, ELO II wasn't ELO,and the Heads weren't the Talking Heads. The new band probably warrant a mention, but stating that Kyuss is now known by the new name is false. Just as the above bands, and countless others, morphed into new bands with slightly different names for legal reasons, Kyuss Lives! carries on the tradition of Kyuss, but they unfortunately are not Kyuss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.103.33.221 (talk) 02:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I heard it was pronounced "Chaos". Does anyone else know?--Richy 17:32, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yepp, I think I know. Found this explanation: "Kyuss is [this] thingee from the old D&D game. There are monsters in a really old book called Deities and Demigods called the Sons of Kyuss (hence the name of the first album/single). The monster, originally from the Newhon Tales by Fritz Leiber, was removed from later versions of the book, Legends and Lore, due to copyright shit. I originally picked up Blues because I thought the name was cool and remembered it from my long ago days playin' the game. [...] Oh, and the way you pronounce it is "chi-uss" (the "chi" is hard as in "kite" or, "kai")." stonerrock.com Hth.. Johnnyw 11:09, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. As proof, they are introduced with that pronounciation at the start of their "Muchas Gracias" compilation record. Ceeker 11:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, actually, the monster Sons of Kyuss are from page 83 of the AD&D 1e Fiend Folio.

Genre[edit]

Okay. i've added Rock Duro Y Heavy to their genres. That's the genre that comes up when you upload there cd's onto your computer, so it's an official genre.



Right, let's keep it at stoner rock and desert rock. Whoever put heavy metal as their third genre is completely wrong, kyuss were too phychedelic to be heavy metal.


These guys are definetly heavy/stoner metal on "Wretch" Have you even listened to that album. They tune their guitars down 2 steps and have plenty of distortion = heavy metal. Go listen. Go listen to "green machine" the riffing of that song resembles any metal song —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.18.85.109 (talk) 12:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stoner metal is another term for stoner rock, and stoner (rock) is influenced by metal anyway. 82.41.209.185 (talk) 22:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I have never liked the term "stoner rock" or "stoner metal". I just don't think it's an accurate description of the music and it makes us fans all sound like idiot pot-heads. To me Kyuss is just Heavy Metal. Just my 2 cents.--Freshfighter9 (talk) 16:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

first: no, stoner metal and stoner rock is not the same. there are two clearly distinguishalbe genres. and Kyuss have nothing to do with heavy metal. Kyuss is known to be the band that pioneered the palm desert scene. the palm desert scene is known to be the cradle to the upspring of stoner rock also called desert rock. why the name desert rock? because its palm DESERT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.163.249.82 (talk) 18:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Kyuss have nothing to do with heavy metal"??? In what universe? --Freshfighter9 (talk) 19:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

because its not heavy metal? whoever removed stoner rock, dont.. Kyuss plays stoner rock... fact. peroid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.160.75.133 (talk) 12:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK guys, I guess I wasn't aware that Denmark was Bizarro World. You're entitled to your opinions but to say that Kyuss isn't metal is like saying that the sky isn't blue.

i said it wasnt HEAVY metal, early kyuss is stoner metal.. also stoner rock is metal influenced.. so it is metal, im agreeing with you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.163.249.82 (talk) 20:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Castlevania cover[edit]

Hi, I was wondering... I have this .mp3 of a metal cover to 3 songs from Castlevania 2 for the NES. At the end of the .mp3 they say the next song they will play is "Fatso Forgetso" so I have to assume that the .mp3 is Kyuss playing (even though the .mp3 info says "Minibosses"). Can anyone verify this? There seems to be no info on google about these guys ever playing video game covers... or at least the results I get are really inconclusive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.225.187.30 (talk) 11:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong on all counts. Kyuss are Psychedelic influnced, but have roots in Metal and even Thrash Metal. They even said so themselves, they never calssed themselves as a Stoner band at all.

Hailing from Palm Desert, CA, Kyuss (pronounced "kai-uss") has become something like a heavy metal equivalent to the Velvet Underground.The band enjoyed little commercial success during their brief existence, but their combination of sludgy, down-tuned guitars (often played through a bass amp for maximum, earth-shaking intensity), spacey jams, galloping thrash metal rhythms, and organic drums became a blueprint, often copied, but never quite replicated by countless underground metal bands.

Formed in 1990 by vocalist John Garcia, guitarist Josh Homme, bassist Nick Oliveri, and drummer Brant Bjork, Kyuss (named after a character from Dungeons & Dragons) began jamming at so-called "desert parties," in and around the isolated towns of the Southern California desert. The band gradually built a local following, signed with tiny independent label Dali Records, and released their first album, Wretch, in 1991. Under-produced and poorly financed, the album failed to capture the band's live sound and went mostly unnoticed until sporadic touring started earning Kyuss a reputation as a ferocious live unit, as well as the respect of many fellow musicians. One of these, Masters of Reality singer/guitarist Chris Goss, decided to produce the band's next effort, and the collaboration bore fruit in 1992's stunning Blues for the Red Sun. Soon hailed as a landmark by critics and fans alike, the album took the underground metal world by storm and established the signature Kyuss sound once and for all: the doom heaviness of Black Sabbath, the feedback fuzz of Blue Cheer, and the space rock of Hawkwind, infused with psychedelic flashes, massive grooves, and a surprising sensibility for punk rock, metal, and thrash.

Based on this sudden surge of interest, the band was signed by Elektra Records just as Dali was about to go bankrupt, and despite the loss of bassist Oliveri (he was replaced by Scott Reeder, formerly of the Obsessed), the band continued building momentum with 1994's Welcome to Sky Valley. Also recorded under Goss' guidance, the album nearly matched the brilliance of its predecessor and saw Kyuss taking the novel approach of grouping the songs into three extended suites. Still, despite such creative promise and an ever-growing fan base, personal strife had already begun tearing the band apart, and drummer Brant Bjork was the first to depart when they concluded their fall tour. Then, although they quickly recruited the jazz-trained Alfredo Hernandez to replace him on 1995's noticeably less inspired ...And the Circus Leaves Town, a final rift between Homme and Garcia finally brought Kyuss' meteoric run to a disappointing halt.

2000's Muchas Gracias: The Best of Kyuss collected rare outtakes and live recordings and effectively put a capper on the Kyuss legacy, but after a period of relative silence, each bandmember's talent began leaving its mark on a number of relevant projects. Garcia briefly worked with straightforward desert rockers Slo Burn in 1997 before reuniting with Reeder in the much more promising (but ultimately doomed) Unida, later lending his in-demand pipes to Hermano and other bands. Brant Bjork sang and played guitar in his own power trio, Che (featuring his Kyuss replacement Hernandez on drums), and released a number of solo albums while joining top fuzz rockers Fu Manchu on a full-time basis. As for Josh Homme, discounting a short touring stint as rhythm guitarist for Screaming Trees, he initially retreated into production and spent much of the late '90s collaborating with an impressive array of musicians on the eclectic Desert Sessions. Some of this material was later reworked into his next major project, Queens of the Stone Age, which saw him paired with original Kyuss bassist Nick Oliveri (who had kept busy working with Dwarves) and, at first, drummer Hernandez, as well. Ironically, by their third release (and last with Oliveri), 2002's Songs for the Deaf, Queens of the Stone Age had achieved significantly larger sales than Kyuss ever did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.210.214 (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

kyuss picture change[edit]

I tried a few times but can someone changed the kyuss 'circus leaves town' era picture to one that reflects the earlier members of the band more? I mean cmon most people find the earlier lineups more popular so give the people what they want. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sgr927 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image being added is tagged as an album cover. Covers are only fair-use in the article from where the cover was sourced. They cannot be used here. Do not add content that violates Wikipedia policy including WP:FAIR. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 02:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe it is an album cover, unless it is some limited edition or alternate. A quick perusal of our Kyuss album articles will confirm that.Skomorokh 02:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It certainly isn't one. But it's tagged as one. And if the tag is false then the image can be speedy deleted. It is likely an inner liner image scanned and tagged falsely as a cover. Either which way the image can be marked for removal from Wikipedia. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 02:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can does not imply should. Not being warped, it's superior to our current fair use image, which is also a liner image. Skomorokh 02:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

katzenjammer[edit]

hey there! as native speaker of german i'm suprised to see this:
"Katzenjammer (literally 'screaming cats'- used colloquially to describe a hangover)"
quite literally it should rather be translated as 'cat's lament/moaning'

Paranoid Android1208 (talk) 22:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I totally agree !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.134.96.99 (talk) 08:07, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a german, too and woundered also about this thing. i looked it up at leo.org and german wiki. It was indeed a slangword for hangover but centuries ago. Today, nobody in germany would know that correlation i guess. I added archaic just as they do at leo.org to indicate this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.96.221.43 (talk) 08:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am also a native speaker but I managed to look up the term in an English dictionary, which stated it as a dated synonym for hangover. So, it is of absolutely no interest whether this expression had any meaning in a foreign language. What really puzzles me though is that no one made the connection to the Katzenjammer Kids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.0.100.176 (talk) 06:06, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Original" Lineup?[edit]

The pic of the 1992 lineup reads "original lineup", but I thought the original lineup was with Chris Cockrell, not Nick Olivieri. Wasn't Cockrell replaced with Olivieri in '91? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.177.91.42 (talk) 23:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I would have to concur that the 1992 "Blues" lineup with Oliveri is not the original lineup.--Freshfighter9 (talk) 20:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to the the book by Joel MCIVER, "The Queens of the Stoneage Story", the original line-up was Bjork, Homme, Garcia, Cockrell, and Oliveri on 2.guitar. After Cockrell left, Oliveri switched to bass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sisterandi (talk • contribs) 12:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kyuss Lives![edit]

You can't really say that Kyuss is back under the name "Kyuss Lives!" or active with that name. Since Josh Homme isn't back with them, this isn't Kyuss. That's that. They are doing concerts on the name of "Kyuss Lives!" and rumour has it they might hit the studio with the Kyuss Lives! line-up but it isn't Kyuss. Many of the riffs known by true Kyuss fans were written by either Brant or Josh. Kyuss was the band, Kyuss Lives! is just a project band by John, much like "Garcia Plays Kyuss". I would be much happier seeing Kyuss Lives! has a seperate page, since it is not the same as Kyuss.

I hope that other Kyuss fans see this and agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.21.163.148 (talk) 22:02, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, except you're forgetting that three-fourths Kyuss (Kyuss Lives!) really is more than just one-fourth Kyuss (Garcia Plays Kyuss) and thus closer to being "Full Kyuss". Got me? Seriously though, it isn't all about who writes the songs, but also the unique sound each member brings to a song when playing it. Nick Oliveri and Brant Bjork are both original members of the band and their influence can be heard on each song from Wretch and Blues, whether they took direct part in writing the composition or not they both had their own way of playing their instrument and thus impacted and formed the sound of each song. However, I agree that Josh's presence was a major part of Kyuss' sound and it is a big loss that he won't be playing or recording with them. But you're mistaken to believe that Kyuss was all or even mostly Josh's writing and playing.Soul Crusher (talk) 23:07, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the unsigned commenter 'forgetting' anything. His/Her point is that Kyuss Lives is not Kyuss. Removing the members of Kyuss and replacing them with members of Kyuss Lives, placing information about Kyuss Lives into the Kyuss article, and calling it "a reunion of Kyuss" doesn't make it Kyuss. It only makes it a project band that came out of former members of Kyuss. It's a different thing entirely. Example: three members of Pink Floyd coming together without, say, David Gilmour and calling it a Pink Floyd reunion. It would not be a reunion of Pink Floyd.--Isablidine (talk) 02:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does any of this actually have anything to do with improving the article? It reads like a forum topic. --LordNecronus (talk) 12:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is that the only informations we have about it is that it is called Kyuss Lives, that 75% of its members have been part of Kyuss and that this is very likely that they will only play Kyuss songs suring live shows. This is definitely not enough to be featured in an article of its own. Moreover, all these informations are in the scope of Kyuss. Maimai009 (talk) 15:02, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like I posted a bit hastily - when I first posted, I didn't notice the parts asking for a separate Kyuss Lives! page, and assumed that this was just a discussion about how it's not really Kyuss without Josh Homme. Anyway, I agree; there's not enough info for a full Kyuss Lives! article. --LordNecronus (talk) 16:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discography[edit]

Hi. I see that Sons of Kyuss is listed under the Discography section, which is wrong somehow as generally only studio albums are listed there. Sons of Kyuss is a demo, moreover released under an other name than Kyuss yet very close (Sons of Kyuss). The same appears in the discography article.
If no one disagrees, I will remove it from the Discography section, and create a Demo section in the discography article where Sons of Kyuss would be included. Feel free to give your opinion. Maimai009 (talk) 14:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No objection here. HrZ (talk) 14:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Maimai009 (talk) 20:06, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

Hi. I have started a discussion about Kyuss' template here. Maimai009 (talk) 15:45, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reunion[edit]

I'm having a problem with Kyuss Lives! being listed in this article as Kyuss and would like to heavily edit the page. My arguments are listed below. Please share your views.

My Arguments:

  1. The article itself outlines how there was/is not to be a "reunion of Kyuss". Many of the members of Kyuss are quoted that while they would have liked to have made a reunion in the end, the band's pivotal member, Joshua Homme, has to-date refused to entertain the idea.
  2. Kyuss Lives! is marketed not as Kyuss, but as Kyuss Lives! This is backed up by their touring as Kyuss Lives! not Kyuss.
  3. Kyuss Lives! is a spin-off of Kyuss and this will be proved true once their album is released, as it will be released as Kyuss Lives!, not as Kyuss
  4. Just because there isn't enough material to create an article for Kyuss Lives! in its own right shouldn't make it ok to add their band and member information on an article about a group that no longer exists.
  5. Garcia himself is quoted in the article here, "there is never going to be a Kyuss without Josh Homme."
  6. In the intro section of the article is written, "However, in November 2010, Kyuss announced a reunion as Kyuss Lives!, who plan to tour and release a new album in 2011. Guitarist Bruno Fevery will be filling in for Homme, who has always discouraged talk of a reunion." This is not a factual statement. "Kyuss" did not announce a reunion. Former members of Kyuss announced a spin-off tour and album.

Therefore, I would like to:

  • remove the 'Reunion (as Kyuss Lives!) (2010-present) section by splitting the information about Kyuss Lives! into the 'Post-break up (1996–2009)' section and the portion of the section about after the band's breakup in 1995 to the 'As Kyuss (1991–1995)' section
  • removing references to a "reunion" in the Intro section
  • change the Infobox information to reflect the members of Kyuss as it was when bisbanded in 1995.
  • remove the Kyuss Lives! information from the 'Members' section.

My proposed edits are here sans the infobox which I would edit as outlined above. --Isablidine (talk) 20:05, 26 February 2011 (UTC) (removed link to test page)Isablidine 19:06, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I agree with some of your points, and disagree with some others. As I have stated in another discussion, while Kyuss Lives! is not totally Kyuss (because of the name), it is fully part of Kyuss' history, as were Katzenjammer and Sons of Kyuss. But we can't omit Kyuss Lives! from the Kyuss article, it is a reunion act. Yes it doesn't bear exactly the same name, but as far as we know, Kyuss Lives! will play Kyuss material live, and it's not just a simple cover band (like Garcia plays Kyuss) because 3 quarter of its members were previously members of Kyuss. The fact that Josh Homme is not part of it doesn't change anything, the number of bands reuniting without one of its prominent members is endless. And about the new album, well, that's an other story and we'll deal with it when its release is officially comfirmed, if ever it comes out.
My comments on your proposed changes:
  • I suggest that we leave the 'Reunion (as Kyuss Lives!) (2010-present)' section as it is. As I stated above, it's part of Kyuss' history.
  • The first section of the header should be changed as it is on your version while keeping the second part from the current article. Two little sentences about Kyuss Lives! don't kill.
  • I agree that the infobox and the members section should reflect the 1995 line up, although Kyuss Lives! line up should be mentionned somewhere. I have updated myself Template:Kyuss in that direction.
Maimai009 09:53, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That works and I agree, certainly Kyuss Lives! is part of Kyuss' history. I wasn't thinking of Kyuss Lives! as a reunion band but more of a spin-off (based on any future albums) but your arguments are clear and valid considering, at this point, they will be playing Kyuss songs. I'll make the changes as outlined here and work in the Lives! line-up into the Lives! section. Isablidine 16:47, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I screwed up the references and am working on fixing that.(noob!) Isablidine 18:08, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since Kyuss Lives! is not exactly a Kyuss reunion (nor is it known if the "original" Kyuss had to change their name), I definitely think Kyuss Lives! needs its own article (like for example: a spin-off version of Queen named Queen + Paul Rodgers has an article, as does Sublime with Rome, the spin-off version of Sublime). 76.191.133.247 (talk) 23:24, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"World Tours" section[edit]

It seems to me the "World Tours" section is completely unnecessary and should be removed. It doesn't provide a shred of information and is completely unsourced. Every band or artist goes on tour to promote themselves, but is there any point to mentioning every tour in a special section? Freshfighter9talk 15:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia website not a fan site. 205.155.154.122 (talk) 19:26, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Corruption in "Lineups" table?[edit]

Is it my imagination, or is the "Lineups" table (in the section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyuss#Personnel) fairly messed up? It presents, at various points, Garcia as rhythm guitarist and drummer, Reeder as lead guitarist, etc. Carlsefni (talk) 17:34, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative metal[edit]

The genre is properly sourced and someone keeps removing it. The argument that "Kyuss isn't alternative metal" means nothing since it's sourced through allmusic which is the most reliable website when it comes to sourcing genres.

Here's another source calling Kyuss alternative metal http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-30/entertainment/chi-kyuss-lives-profile-kyuss-lives-interviewed-20111129_1_nick-oliveri-brant-bjork-band I call the big one bitey (talk) 14:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two points about your sources: the chicagotribune.com article refers to "a deep appreciation of ‘80s punk and alternative metal" but does not at any point refer to Kyuss as alternative metal. So that source is invalid. Secondly, allmusic.com can hardly be referred to as "the most reliable website when it comes to sourcing genres". That's a stretch to say the least. Allmusic's writers/contributors regularly take issue and/or contradict the genres allmusic has assigned to an artist. Additionally, there has already been a discussion on this very talk page regarding genre and alternative metal was never even brought up. ChakaKongtalk 14:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here are more sources https://www.google.com.au/search?q=%22kyuss%22+%22alt+metal%22&hl=en&tbo=d&tbm=nws&source=lnt&tbs=ar:1&sa=X&ei=MeDqUKz6BqOImQXlp4HwCw&ved=0CCYQpwUoBQ&biw=1366&bih=667 Both are pay per view articles, but one calls them a "sludgy alt-metal" band and the other one refers to them as a "legendary alt-metal" band.

Also allmusic is still a reliable source, even if the genre is controversial. For example Nickelback is tagged as heavy metal and alternative metal with allmusic as the only source for those two genres on their page. And i personally believe Kyuss to be part of the alternative metal genre, since alternative metal is defined as a fusion between alternative rock and heavy metal, and Kyuss technically are an alternative band because of the punk influence in their music. But i can understand why people may take objection to them being called alternative metal, since the genre is usually associated with nu metal, which of coarse Kyuss sound nothing like. I call the big one bitey (talk) 14:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What you "personally believe" is irrelevant. This is an encyclopedia and verifiability is absolutely essential. Kyuss is not "technically an alternative band". I don't think you're going to get much support for that claim. Whatever Kyuss is, it isn't alternative metal. The members of Kyuss may have been influenced by punk, but Kyuss' music was not punk and/or alternative in any way. Although I've never been fond of the "stoner rock" tag, that particular sub-genre is where Kyuss best fits. ChakaKongtalk 15:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please read this before you try to convince us that allmusic is the Alpha and Omega of genre definitions. There is a very clear consensus that allmusic cannot be used to source genres. And in regards to those pay-per-view articles you want to use to back your argument, they do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for reliable sources because they can not generally be checked for accuracy. ChakaKongtalk 17:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(Before stating my point, I'd like to say that the main criticism against Allmusic on Wikipedia stems from its genre tags on the sidebars; I can't sight any consensus against the reviews or the written text itself on the discussion you've brought up. This was discussed more specifically on WP:ALBUMS and RSN) Besides the sources on top, Eduardo Rivadavia of Allmusic describes Kyuss' style as "the doom heaviness of Black Sabbath, the feedback fuzz of Blue Cheer, and the space rock of Hawkwind, infused with psychedelic flashes, massive grooves, and a surprising sensibility for punk rock, metal, and thrash" which suits perfectly to the alternative metal's main concept of musical fusion. Also considering the relationship between stoner rock and alternative metal, as indicated here (This source actually refers to Kyuss as a "perfect fit for the eclectic tastes of the early-'90s alternative metal movement" by the way), alt-metal labeling for Kyuss is actually pretty valid. Myxomatosis75 (talk) 17:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I'm still not seeing any source to support this aside from allmusic, and as I clearly showed above, consensus is very clear that allmusic is not a reliable source for genre classification. ChakaKongtalk 17:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As I said before, there is no actual consensus reached on that discussion to disclude all Allmusic content/text regarding the genres; the discussion mainly deals with the tags on the sidebar. Myxomatosis75 (talk) 17:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is an almost unanimous consensus that allmusic's genre assignments to artists are unreliable. What are you missing? ChakaKongtalk 17:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Myxomatosis57 asked me to comment here, and my understanding, as well as what I believe previous consensus has been, is that Allmusic's sidebar is not considered reliable for genre sourcing, but that the text inside the reviews for albums or in the biography for a band is reliable for sourcing genres. Thus, if Kyuss were listed as "alternative metal" in the sidebar, I would not consider that acceptable for sourcing, but if their biography page on Allmusic calls them "something like a heavy metal equivalent to the Velvet Underground", that's sufficient as a source for heavy metal. —Torchiest talkedits 19:38, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not seeing any reference to alternative metal in the band bio or album reviews. Based upon your reasoning, allmusic can be disregarded as a reliable source. ChakaKongtalk 20:10, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Allmusic article for stoner rock (or stoner metal) refers to Kyuss as "a perfect fit for the eclectic tastes of the early-'90s alternative metal movement". Myxomatosis75 (talk) 20:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly I don't know much about Kyuss, but Allmusic is definitely credible. Mrmoustache14 (talk) 20:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@ChakaKong There's no policy on you're opinion of Pay Per View articles not being valid sources. The actual quote can be viewed here by accessing the link to the google search result. Books can be cited with no actual link to the material and the same goes for these Pay Per View articles. I call the big one bitey (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any source that cannot be adequately accessed for verification can be challenged and/or removed. ChakaKongtalk 20:53, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've found the fully accessible version of the LA Times article, by the way. It refers to Kyuss as alt-metal and desert rock. Myxomatosis75 (talk) 21:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)I'm not sure why you think that my reasoning leads to the conclusion that Allmusic is not reliable. All I've said is that there has been previous agreement to not use the sidebar for sourcing. Using the text of reviews and bios is okay. If there is a review, bio, or other article on Allmusic that describes Kyuss as whatever genre, then it's reliable. —Torchiest talkedits 21:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You misunderstood what I said. You stated that in order for allmusic to be regarded as a reliable source it would need to classify the band as alternative metal either within the band bio or within the individual album reviews. My point was that, since it mentions alternative metal in neither, allmusic can thus be disregarded as a source in this instance. ChakaKongtalk 22:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well the consensus is currently for alternative metal to be added. There are three users for it being included and two users against it being added, as well as 3 sources which put Kyuss in the alternative metal category and 2 other sources for stoner rock, "desert rock" (whatever that is) and heavy metal. I call the big one bitey (talk) 21:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not so, my friend, there is no consensus here and I still see no reliable sources. According to Wikipedia guidelines, the presiding administrator must determining if consensus has been reached. It's not as simple as outvoting someone 3 to 2 over a period of less than one day. I'm still not satisfied that there are adequate reliable sources to back up a genre change. ChakaKongtalk 22:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked by User:Myxomatosis57 to provide a third opinion on this issue, and I will be brief. First, regarding allmusic. There is a general consensus that allmusic tags are unreliable, because they are not attributable to an author and they often contain errors. The actual written content, however, as found in reviews and biographies, fits Wikipedia's standards of reliable sources. They are written by professionals and published by a third party with editorial oversight. The genre histories are a little more debateable, as while they used to be attributable to authors, allmusic has since removed such attribution. However, the genre histories are written by the allmusic staff, and are much more detailed and nuanced than simple tags. My personal recommendation is that allmusic genre descriptions should be used in tandem with other sources. Second, according to WP:PAYWALL, the Boston Globe and LA Times sources are still reliable even though the require payment to access. In conclusion, there are 3 different sources explicitly calling Kyuss alt-metal. This definitely warrants inclusion in the style section of the article, though I think it could be left out of the infobox because "heavy metal" is the broader term, and the infobox should always lean more on the generalized side than the specific.--¿3family6 contribs 22:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We've already established that allmusic's "actual written content" found in reviews and biographies for Kyuss makes absolutely NO MENTION of alternative metal. Why must we still be discussing whether allmusic can be regarded as a reliable source in this discussion, because I have proven (based on the definitions others are providing, no less) that it's not. ChakaKongtalk 22:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, dear me, there appears to be no style section in the article. I think that is the main problem right there. I would highly recommend that one be created in order to help avoid disputes such as this and keep the infobox broad in scope.--¿3family6 contribs 22:10, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it certainly seems that Myxomatosis57 is picking and choosing other users to ask to join this discussion in a rather obvious attempt to get consensus to swing in the desired direction. I have added a request for comment box in order to obtain outside input that will be unbiased. As I've already mentioned, it's going to come down to the presiding administrator in order to add the genre in accordance with the guidelines. A short discussion over a period of a few hours can hardly be described as the community analyzing the issue in depth and at length. ChakaKongtalk 22:25, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but you've misinterpreted what I said. The specific genre doesn't matter. All that matters is where it is mentioned on Allmusic. The mention of a genre in the sidebar is insufficient to use as a source for that genre. The mention of a genre in a review, bio, or other piece of written work is sufficient as a source for that genre. Again, Allmusic is a reliable source, except for the sidebars. I hope that clarifies. —Torchiest talkedits 23:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to explain this one more time. What I'm trying to tell you is that I'm not seeing any reference to alternative metal in allmusic's reviews and bio for Kyuss. You are saying that is where the reference to alternative metal would have to be in order to use it as a source for that genre... correct? Only the sidebar lists alternative metal and it's you who's saying that the sidebar "is insufficient to use as a source for that genre". My entire point is that there is no mention of alternative metal in the sections in which you are saying they would have to be in order to use allmusic as a source. Are we clear now? ChakaKongtalk 23:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it just sounded like you were dismissing Allmusic in general. I honestly don't have a preference on what genres to use. —Torchiest talkedits 00:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[1] "Stoner metal could be campy and self-aware, messily evocative, or unabashedly retro; in any case, bands like Monster Magnet and Kyuss were perfect fits for the eclectic tastes of the early-'90s alternative metal movement." Myxomatosis75 (talk) 09:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well the allmusic issue has been resolved, now all that is left to ask is why alternative metal shouldn't added to the infobox since there is a completely reliable newspaper (L.A Times) calling Kyuss a "legendary alt-metal band", along with another reliable source (Boston Globe) that also labels them an alternative metal band. Once again reliable sources completely trump one's personal opinion. I call the big one bitey (talk) 00:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I call the big one bitey: Need I remind you that the need for reliable sources to trump your personal opinion is what started this entire discussion. Rather than let the information dictate, you've scrambled to find dubious and indeterminate sources to back up an opinion, and I don't think that's the way we as editors should operate. Just allow the RfC process to play itself out over the next couple of days and we'll see where the chips fall. ChakaKongtalk 01:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Three sources doesn't give the impression of a prominent genre of the band. The L.A. Times and Boston Globe don't appear to go into any detail as to why they are alternative metal either, which would help with the arguement of its inclusion in the infobox. With genres, and their inclusion in infoboxes, often being disputed, a source simply saying "alt-metal band Kyuss" isn't enough. At the most, I would suggest it should get a minor mention in the article in a musical style (which this article is lacking) but there is not enough to include it in the infobox. HrZ (talk) 15:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't care how this turns out, but if it helps the discussion, I did find another source that lists a Kyuss album as a definitive alt-metal example: [2].--¿3family6 contribs 02:32, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well it seems this discussion has ended with no consensus (or so it seems) so i'll just go ahead and get around to adding a musical style and influences section in due time, which will include a mention of alternative metal, since there are multiple sources describing Kyuss as such, which have been proven reliable per WP:PAYWALL. If there are any objections then please voice your opinion here. I call the big one bitey 13:38, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

A single user suggesting that it "warrants inclusion in the style section of the article" doesn't give you a green light by any means. The RfC did literally nothing to prove that an alternative metal genre addition should go ahead in any form. If the RfC process did nothing to give you anything even resembling consensus, you are going to meet more resistance. I'd strongly suggest more discussion before you "just go ahead" and add it. ChakaKongtalk 17:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:31, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Kyuss. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:43, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Homme open to a reunion?![edit]

Added this tidbit, maybe a new section? "But to be honest with you, and to answer your question, there have been times I thought it cannot end that way, and the only real way to end it correctly now would be to play," he explained. "And because they sort of perverted the punctuation and they knocked the wing off this beautiful dragon that's an ice sculpture, and the only way to put the motherfucking wing back on would be to [play again].

"I have thought about this, especially in the last few years, to do something special, and even to make up for that mistake of Brant and, unfortunately, John, to make up for it. [I thought we should] play and give all the money away. Like, play for the fans — cover your costs and make it five bucks. Figure out a way to be, like, this is how the punctuation will end the sentence of this band. Because it was never about money — it never was about money. It never was about fame, and when it felt like that was the move they were making, I was so sad." Hobie92 (talk) 05:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kyuss&oldid=1195539386"