Talk:Static-X

Evil Disco

Just to clarify. Static-X has referred to themselves as "Evil Disco" not "Death Disco". I will change if no one contests this. StereoDevil (talk) 15:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

This page is getting out of hand again. We need to remove trivia items from Cameos / Appearances. Posters on the wall are are not appearances. I will remove if no objections. StereoDevil (talk) 23:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Images

I think the images are of so poor quality that only the main image should be used. There is no actual reason for using the rest anyways.

1. They detract from the article making it look bad. 2. It's only 3 band members and they are placed in different album eras. So what is the point of using them? If anything there should be something related to each album there if anything.

So my point is that I think they should be removed for now and leave the main one till we find a fair use image that has ALL the current members. StereoDevil

I disagree. They may be blurry, but they're free use. It's definately better than nothing. If you have some pictures of them that you have taken yourself, they can be used here. The Prince 19:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

On this article it is not about the pics. They are not needed. They do not pertain to the sections. The sections are about the albums not band members and there are thousands of pages that have just the main pic so it is not always better to have something than nothing. This does not need them unless they relate to the section.

Just leave the main pic until there is a better one but the others detract from the overall article. StereoDevil

I still disagree. An article always looks better with images. The Prince 09:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

To state that an article always looks better with images shows that you are not looking at anything objectively. Good pics that are related to the content make sense. Bad pics or pics that don't relate to the article do not make sense. I don't want to sound mean but I think the issue is not the pics. The issue is about ego. You don't want to be objective. I am soon going to have good fair use images to replace all the main images and if their are no images that relate to the article I will remove them. If this is a problem I am sure we can get some assistance in settling this from more senior members on Wikipedia. For me it is about trying to make this page BETTER. I have no ideas your motives. Stereodevil 23:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

One last thing. Even in the Manual of style it suggests that "Images should ideally be spread evenly within the article, and relevant to the sections they are located in." and also "You should always be watchful not to overwhelm an article with images by adding more just because you can." So adding images does not always make a page better. StereoDevil 17:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

StereoDevil, please see WP:AGF. Accusing The Prince of not seeing the truth because of his ego is in complete violation of this policy. Anyway, if the images could be dispersed better, they wouldn't be helping it, but they wouldn't be hurting it either. WP:Consensus should decide whether they are used or not. These pictures really aren't that bad; I have seen some terrible free use pics, let me tell you. Also, they cannot be replaced with fair use pics, as if a free alternative exists the rights of fair use are violated and nullified. Peace, The Hybrid T/C 22:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I am uploading better pics. Free Alternatives have been uploaded. This situation is one of two people. There is no concensus with two people. I already had removed them so if he wants to revert them that is fine. Then we can involve more experienced editors to get some concensus.

Alright, if you have better free use pics, then feel free to add them to the article. That would be a good compromise, probably satisfying everyone, and nullifying the need for a conversation. Peace, The Hybrid T/C 04:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

These individual images look horrible, they reflect poorly on the entire article. macacid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.245.205 (talk) 05:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

They are way better than most free use pics. That isn't saying much, but it is saying something. The Hybrid T/C 05:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok done. I also split a section and it worked out fine so that I could get each band member on the page. I do prefer to have band shots for each era and as they become available we can look at that. Now I will start finding references for this article. 76.185.156.220 05:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Those are indeed superior pictures, good job. Cheers, The Hybrid T/C 05:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Biography

Not a very good article.

So fix it :) -- sannse (talk) 17:10, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

If Wayne Static and Ken Jay originally formed the band, who formed the band after them? --Carolaman 20:05, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What do you mean formed after them? A band can only form once.

That's the point I'm making. They formed the band and they originally formed the band means the same thing basically. Thiiiiiiink about it. -- sannse (talk) 17:10, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Soundtrack songs?

• Exactly why doesn't the article list the Static-X songs that appeared on soundtracks, but it lists just the movie/video game? Please list the songs that appeared on them, as most soundtracks don't seem to have articles. --G VOLTT 16:15, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Static-X arent really Industrial Metal; or at least not solely Industrial Metal. *edit* my bad

I also know the 'The Only' was on the Need For Speed game mentioned

Genre

A few people here seem to enjoy changing Static-X's genre to "nu metal." Furthermore, I was accused (I'm assuming he's accusing me) by User:Leyasu of "revert wars." This is incorrect, as the first genres of the article all involved metal, in particular industrial metal (see [[1]]).

If you will look at the page history, clearly the non-registered user who has an IP address always seeming to begin with "87.122." (i.e. [[2]], [[3]], [[4]]). Looking at the history, it is clear he's using the page as a personal vendetta against what he does not consider, in his personal opinion, to be industrial metal -- simply read the reason for his first edit: "in the US every shit is industrial metal..."

Before his contributions, Static-X was classified as an Industrial Metal band. Why change it now? Is there any reason, other than the strong personal opinions of some users, who consider their taste in music, metal particularly, to be the very definition of all genres? Enfestid 03:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I was aiming to kill the revert war and trying to clean up the page. If i made a mistake, so sue me. Ley Shade 04:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Um, sorry but Static-X is not metal at all. The article is confusing industrial rock for industrial metal. Their riffs are clearly not metal. No this is not an opinion. I get a strong feeling that this Enfestid individual lacks the ability to differentiate between rock and metal. If the majority of "metal" bands you listen to include Slipknot, System of a Down, Marilyn Manson, Mudvayne, then no you are not a metal fan, but a rock fan. Hell, even www.metal-archives.com doesn't recognize them as metal and for the most part they are pretty loose with the term metal (even Yngwie Malmsteen, Motley Crue, and the Scorpions can be found on their page). The metal genre stretches very far, but not as far as to include bands like Static-X. I'm so sick and tired of 1-month newbies acting like they know something about metal (yet can't tell the difference between rock and metal).

For actual metal riffs (from various genres of course) check out:

• Venom - Don't Burn the Witch
• Blind Guardian - Run for the Night
• Bathory - In Conspiracy with Satan
• Black Sabbath - TV Crimes
• Sabbat (Jpn) - Hellfire
• Kreator - People of the Lie
• Testament - Disciples of the Watch
• Judas Priest - Night Crawler
• Anthrax - Metal Thrashing Mad
• Accept - Aiming High
• Iron Angel - Rush of Power
• King Diamond - Possession
• Feinstein - Rebelution
• Bulldozer - Desert!
• Dark Angel - Death Is Certain (Life Is Not)

A long list for someone completely unware of what metal really is. Pasajero 09:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Ugh, yet another "metalhead" who thinks their opinion of what is and isn't metal is the very definition of musical genres. I hate to refute your claim, but I can clearly differentiate between "rock" and "metal." I think the difference here is you don't know what industrial metal is -- perhaps you should read the page on it before you jump to such drastic claims.

As for your list, I've heard them all -- and, yes, you are correct, they are all metal. Yet what does this have to do with Static-X's being industrial metal? Answer: it doesn't. Perhaps this "Pasajero fellow" should educate himself in industrial metal. The fact that you're referring to Metal Archives directly points to the metalhead sterotype who has a very close-minded perception of what is and isn't rock, metal, industrial rock and industrial metal. I can list websites that classify Static-X as pretty much any genre, but does that make them right? No. A short response for someone completely pig-headed in their views of musical genres.

Enfestid 19:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

"Industrial metal music is usually centered around metal guitar riffs and industrial synthesizer/sequencer lines, as well as heavily-distorted vocals." The problem here is that Static-X does not use metal riffs (the defining element in ANY metal genre) and therefore cannot possibly be metal. In order to be industrial metal a band must first be metal. The article only supports my original claim. Pasajero 15:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, in that case then, describe what makes a metal riff a metal riff. Because, last time I checked, Static-X has numerous songs that have what would be classified as a "metal riff." Static-X has what the metal article describes as "loud, distorted guitars (usually playing repeated riffs) and simple, pounding rhythms." How can you dispute that they do not? The distorted guitar is one of the key elements of Static-X. The metal article only supports my original claim. Enfestid 21:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

That definition is way too vague. How many rock bands (that aren't considered metal) use loud distorted riffs while played repeatedly and simple? Many! And by that definition they would be metal. The end result is the complete annihilation of the dividing line between rock and metal. To precisely describe a metal riff in words is complicated. It has to be heard. That is why I provided a list of songs with different metal riffs. I compare a Static-X riff with the riffs of the many metal genres and the conclusion is that it is not metal. It just doesn't have that last element that makes a metal riff (audio). To further argue my point it is undeniable that every metal genre came from somewhere (namely a previous metal genre) and it derives their riffs from the previous genre. I have yet to see from what metal genre Static-X derives their riffs from. However, I can think of a non-metal genre that they get their riffs from and that genre is hard rock. Pasajero 17:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC

Heh, so only use the entries when they work to your advantage, right? It said metal guitar riffs, and I gave you what they quoted metal guitar riffs as being -- yet now that doesn't suit you? Either way, Static-X fits the industrial metal tag as defined by Wikipedia, thus that is what they are labeled as. Enfestid 21:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't it just be easier to call them Industrial Nu-Metal... since no matter how you look at it they are basically a Nu-Metal band with programming (and in my view just having a bit of programming doens't qualify you as Industrial anything but I'm probably in the minority here) that way it just stops the arguement. Better examples of Industrial Metal bands can be found in Godflesh (unquestionably fathers of the style) and more recently in Red Harvest... and to be honest Static-X sound like neither of these beyond having triggered drums and some programming.

First of all no one's ever going to come to an aggreement on this. Ya know why. If you go to the Godflesh wikipedia site, people are aguring over whether they're industrial metal or "grind-core" (whatever that is). So to try to figure out what static-x is by comparing them to Godflesh is pointless. Besides Static-x is evil disco.

I think everyone is forgetting the one fact that is most important about Static X: They suck ass, regardless of their genre. Did anyone see them open for Megadeath? They played 2 notes the entire night. I've never seen so many fans get pissed off at a band they love. I know that Megadeath is lightyears ahead of Static X, but they straight up got blown out of the water.20:11, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The discussion page is not about your opinion on whether they suck ass or not. It is to discuss the wikipedia entry. So anything you said is pretty worthless because you don't care about them anyways. So go somewhere else. StereoDevil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.156.220 (talk) 19:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe the only way to solve this dilemna is to take their repertoire by an album-by-album basis. In my opinion both Wisconsin Death Trip and Machine are Industrial Metal as they include features similar to an industrial (that of sirens and heavy machinery - hence the name Industrial) This is seen in the guitar setup, unique time setting and drum rhythm. However, with the release of Shadow Zone these features appear with less frequency, appearing to take a more characteristic Heavy Metal stance (with the near-disappearance of synthesised beats). Whatever your views about whether it should be labelled exclusively Industrial Metal or not, you cannot deny that there is an Industrial influence. 82.18.228.81 20:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but Shadow Zone was a very weird album for static-x. You forgot to mention Start a War which returns to their original industrial influenced music.

I'm With Stupid/Otsego

These two sections really seem to take away from the page. Is there not another place in which they could be put instead of the Static-X page? Maybe on the pages for the albums each is on (in the case of Otsego, all of them?). It just doesn't seem like an encyclopedia article. Enfestid 23:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I made a page for I'm With Stupid a while ago, but I have no idea what to do with the whole Otsego thing. I agree though, it doesn't seem like an encyclopedia article very much. - James 13:00, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Related Artists and Influences

• Does this part of the article make much sense to have? It's just a list of bands that have nothing to do with Static-X, except for some of the major influences. It also seems a little bit more of a definition of a music genre. - James 19:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

How is it not note-worthy? I see no reason to remove it. Numerous other articles include similar references.

Enfestid 23:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

the information contained in the related artists section is useful and interesting, maybe the lay-up itself could be changed, I don't know but I wish more band pages had a description of the music they play beyond just naming the genre (which is disputed by most) and leaving it at that. It could be expanded though.

Ken Jay

Hey, I edited the biography quite a while ago, and I just remembered one thing I had been very confused about. The biography said Ken Jay left the band due to "political differences", however the former members section says he left due to "musical differences", so in the biography I put "due to musical and political differences", just to be sure. I'm pretty sure either one is wrong, but I can't seem to find out which one is. Does anyone know what actually made him leave the band, or should we cut out the reason he left from the article? - James 17:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Influences

Static-X Influences (from an interview of 1999): Joy Division, The Sisters Of Mercy, Coal Chamber, The Prodigy, The Chrystal Method...

These bands are rockbands or big beat artists. They're not industrial artists. So, where is the influence of industrial music? Static-X is definitely not an industrial metal band.

I have to disagree with you fully. Firstly, a band can be influenced by another band, yet still appear in a separate musical genre. E.g. Many bands list The Beatles as influences yet they do not follow the same formula of 60s rock and roll. Secondly, two of the influences in your supposed source are described in Wikipedia as Industrial in nature: Coal Chamber are included as "Industrial Metal" in the Genre tab, and The Prodigy are seen as combining many elements incuding "industrial". 82.18.228.81 19:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The Prodigy had never used industrial elements. That's dullcrap. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.122.26.22 (talk) 19:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

Actually Waynes cites his influence to Disco music, on the Shadow Zone DVD he refers to "Static-X" as "Evil Disco" Jay316 23:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Static X is Nu Metal and Industrial!

Alright, the only reason that Static X is "Nu metal" is because they came out around the same time Nu Metal was at the peak of it's popularity. I've heard every Static X album, and I can say without a doubt, that they are in fact an Industrial Metal band, which is what I am going to change it to. If you have a problem, complain to someone else on another page. 129.252.215.115 20:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't have any problem with the change. I agree with you. StereoDevil (talk) 23:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

ok, someone changed it back to nu-metal, but they have a source. that source says they came out of the nu-metal era. so that doesnt mean there that, jsut means they came out then. they are industrial, and if noone minds, someone should change it. they are totally not numetal. -some guy, on march 20th.

Static-X and Devil Driver?!

Where is the proof for this? There are no offical, public announcements on either bands pages and it's not on the Ozzeft website?Arson5000

Fair use rationale for Image:Shadow zone.jpg

Image:Shadow zone.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Machine.jpg

Image:Machine.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Static-x44.jpg

Image:Static-x44.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Band Members

On the former members listed, three of them are just session members. I propose taking them off the list of former members listed in the article(former members would mean that they were in the band instead of just sitting in). -- Mogthetormentor 19:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I know a guy that used to be in Static X just before Wisconsin Death Trip, but his name isn't anywhere to be seen. My buddy has valid claims with decent evidence and doesn't want money, just some acknowledgment. I'm trying to put together a Wikipedia page for him, but it was deleted once and I don't want it to happen again. I've reviewed the notability and citation credibility stuff, but I'm a little lost.

I'm just trying to start the discussion and get a little guidance. Thatwillbeall (talk) 02:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Opperation Annihalation Tour

Does anyone know if these guys are the main act or are Shadows Fall, I see them on Oct, 10 2007. Skeeker _[Talk] 03:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Annihilation tour was static-x's, so therefor they were the main act. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.245.205 (talk) 05:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nu metal

Darn. I think Static-X is not nu metal. It has some nu metal features, but it's not nu metal. --84.249.61.239 (talk) 21:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. If you look at the music structurally it doesn't really fall into that category. Even lyrically. The problem is that people will keep changing it and fighting so if people want to have both that's fine. If anyone removes industrial though then I will revert it. StereoDevil (talk) 03:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll agree too, the sound may have a few Nu metal qualities, but not enough to actually be Nu metal. The overall sound really isn't Nu metal, and I'll revert any edits that say it's Nu metal.Felix-schade (talk) 07:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

If people were to look at wiki's own entry for nu-metal they would see that vocally Static-X is not nu-metal and are much more like Ministry and Prong which are not nu-metal. In fact there are tons of songs by Static-X that are obviously taken from the Ministry / Prong sound. I did speak with one guy on wiki and he said that the press labeled them nu-metal and that was good enough. These are opinions. It is not a fact that Static-X is nu-metal. No amount of what the press says makes anything true. I think the concensus in the community is that they are very heavily influenced by industrial music. Although they are not going to fall into tradition industrial music, they exhibit these elements much more than they do any elements of nu-metal. Detuning guitars does not make you automatically nu-metal. StereoDevil (talk) 13:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

All nu metal references were unreliable. 84.249.61.239 (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Static-X isn't nu metal because a couple of people decided they aren't. Wikipedia is based on sourced content, not on opinions. Look at the sources, they are reliable. Popmatters, rolling stones, artistdirect are all recommended reliable review sites (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums#Review sites) and rockdetector is widely used on wikkipedia... Static-X might not have nu metal vocals but that isn't a prerequisite for being nu metal (just listen to Disturbed, System of a Down, Slipknot, and many other nu metal bands). Kameejl ^(Talk) 12:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I repeat, Static-X does NOT have a Nu metal sound, they have a few Nu metal qualities, but not nearly enough to be considered Nu metal. I will undo any changes saying that they are Nu metal.Felix-schade (talk) 22:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)