Talk:Kill 'Em All

A couple of points worth mentioning

This article points out the fact that Megadeth fans were calling Metallica hypocrites for sending James to rehab and not Dave Mustaine. Putting the ludicrousness of this statement aside, it is worth mentioning that on the SKOM DVD, if you listen to the band's voice commentary, at the bit were Mustaine is griping about not being sent to AA or something, Hetfield (who as we know was not present for the meeting) says, "Dude, if we knew what AA was we would have been there, you know?" I think this is a worthwhile inclusion to the article, certainly in Metallica's defence.

Secondly, the article states that Cliff Burton is credited with coming up with the name 'Kill 'Em All' as a response to weak record distributors. However, I am fairly certain I once read it was actually Ulrich who came up with it. As the story went, Ulrich was famously drunk in some bar and was griping about not being able to call the album 'Metal Up Your Ass'. He began saying "F*ck 'em all" and realised what a great album title that statement would be. Eventually the band agreed upon 'Kill 'Em All' with the former deemed too offensive for the time. I can't confirm this story, so more research is needed into it, but I will try and dig out the book anyway. --LordLovatt 14:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

No, it was Cliff that came up with the name "Kill 'Em All." An excerpt from the book Metallica: The Frayed Ends of Sanity by Chris Crocker:

The working title for Metallica's debut album was Metal Up Your Ass. Indelicate, but the band no doubt felt it got the point across. When the prospective album distributor's people heard the title, they promptly informed Jonny Z that he'd better start looking for a new distributor. But the band was adamant. A compromise idea was floated that they go acronymic, calling the album M.U.Y.A., but the band wasn't having it. Ultimately, Jon Zazula trekked up to Rochester to tell the band that their music needed to be given a chance--and it didn't need a title that would close doors for them. After a few forget-it-that-one-sucks reactions to possible new album titles, Cliff Burton's exasperation at the record distributors could contain itself no longer. "Kill 'em all, man," he exclaimed. "Just kill 'em all." It was the only title that worked.

64.90.217.245 04:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

why are the last 2 tracks on the album deleted from the playlists "Am I evil" by Diamond Head and "Blitzkrieg" by Blitzkieg? It seems that metallica collected the money and said f-u to the bands that contributed to their fortune.

Are you totally deranged? Sladek 16:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Dave Mustaine

Dave Mustaine made the original version of 'Four Horsemen' called Mechanix. In fact in 'No life til leather' a pre 'kill em all' album by Metallica, the song was called 'Mechanix', and the lyrics were the one's used by Mustaine in his debut Megadeth Album. Metallica edited Mechanix and produced 'Four Horsemen.'

So it is incorrect to state that 'When Dave Mustaine formed Megadeth, he recorded an alternate version of "The Four Horsemen" called "Mechanix", from Killing Is My Business. '

Cause it is exactly the opposite, the anomaly arises cause kill em all was the first to be released.

I noticed that as well. Fixed now.

Megadeth

So, the whole article kind of relies on the reader knowing that "Dave" is the Dave from Megadeth. Maybe instead of listing all kinds of crap details about the dispute, the article should have some info for people who aren't die hard fans of Metallica or Megadeth.

You mean there are people who aren't die-hard fans of Metallica or Megadeth? ;-) 58.178.48.140 09:31, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Done - added bit about who Dave is 82.69.4.121 10:41, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Thrash Metal

I agree that this might be the first thrash metal album, but who is to say it is not up for debate? That part sounds unprofessional. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia not a review of the album in revolver magazine.

I just took a look at the various articles about Metallica. Unfortunately, I almost mistook Wikipedia for a Metallica fanclub. These articles aren't encyclopedic. I'm not the one to fix this; too much work and in the end it would end up in me deleting 70% of the content, while the Metallica fans will revert it back. I don't understand why they don't just join a fanclub instead of writing the stuff here. Nikos 03:46, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey Nikos just because maybe you want the article to be some "only relevant/important facts" article doesn't mean everyone else does. This isn't a dictatorship and all the articles have perfect info, which although somethings are not cited, it gives a good insight or perspective into Metallica, the same goes for all Heavy Metal bands on Wikipedia. I only got into Metallica about this time last year and articles like this have greatly increased my knowledge of everything heavy metal, so much that i did two metal presentations for my English GCSE; a Metallica speech and Heavy Metal coursework about the stereotypes of heavy metal. Both got A*'s, I was only 1 of 2 people to get A* in a class of 25. And I couldn't have done it with out the help and contributions to articles like this from all the true metalheads and headbangers out there, this is a true encyclopedia, it provides knowledge and deeply explored and felt insight. And it would be really sad if it were not like a "fan club", but it were to end up a cold, heartless, summary of facts about the band, simply because someone felt that although something in an article was a well known fact, because it has never been cited in an an interview or anything, it must be deleted. Many may not have the attraction I was given by articles such as this. To those metalheads who put this excellent, in-depth and personally approached information together, I salute and thank you. To guys like Nikos here, unless you have something of relevance to say which will add to or sustain the quality of this article, say nothing at all.

I'm happy for you, getting an A and that, but heed your own words; if you have nothing to say, keep quiet. In contrast to you, I did have something to say, namely that Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia and not a fan magazine that lists every so little irrelevant detail about some artist or tries to put up a "defense" against critics; these things should not be elaborated upon, just mentioned. Grats again on your As and Bs and have a nice day. Nikos 18:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The album title

If its title was "GOTTA Kill'Em All"... Egr, 6/7/2006

That's interesting that Metal up your ass is extremely offensive yet "kill em all" is not? There's something bizarre about that. The Guilty Undertaker 12:02 PM 31 July 2006

In modern Western society, people find curse words more offensive than violence. Pwr.max (talk) 19:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

POV Explanation

This 'article' reads rather like a review - it is easy to say that 'the album was a great influence on other bands,' but this is an encyclopedia and it needs citations.

Musikxpert 03:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

EDIT: Many of today's heavy metal bands very openly cite the early Metallica sound ("Kill 'Em All" most and "...And Justice For All" most notably) as having a huge influence in their sound. I cannot think of any other band specifically on spot besides Bullet For My Valentine but I know for a fact there are more. What I'm trying to say is that there are very many sources (bands that have been quoted) readily available. So much so, that crying so much for one is near pointless.

If it is so readily available it should be easy to source, right?--E tac 10:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Metallica - Kill Em All.jpg

Image:Metallica - Kill Em All.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 22:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. Fair Use justification included - should keep our noses clean. Ajono 11 October 2008

Clarification on album's release date.

It says that the album was recorded in late spring and released in July. Since the documentary Megadeth behind the Music states that the album came out in Winter 1983, I think that might be more accurate since albums take time to be recorded, mixed, mastered, mass produced, marketed and released. Just a clarification/confirmation of the exact release date is all I ask.

• Not sure why a documentary on Megadeth would be cause for a clarification of a widely known fact about a Metallica album. Obviously, given all the evidence to the contrary, the documentary's winter 1983 date is just plain wrong. Pillsbur (talk) 05:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Redirected pages

Can someone tell me why the pages for ALL the songs on this album have been redirected here? I can understand why that would be done for regular songs on the album, I won't argue with that; but for this one, even the songs that were released as singles are redirected here! Last I checked, a song that was released as a single gets its own page, right? --Rock Soldier 21:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

This was the outcome of AfD discussions that had been opened after contested proposed deletions. You can find them referenced in the edit history of the respective redirects. I added just one more redirect for Metal Militia, because it was proposed for deletion as well and had no content, so just contesting it would probably have resulted in another AfD. Now that the others have been merged somewhat, I'll add a mini paragraph for it as well, so that we're at least homogeneous--Tikiwont 08:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I notice that there was in the songs section an entry for (Anesthesia) Pulling Teeth that somehow got lost and should at least partially be recreated. Secondly, there should now be anchors from the track listing to the songs.--Tikiwont 08:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm aware of that, I remember seeing all the songs that were simply songs on the album being tagged for deletion, but this is the only one where the pages for the singles are redirected to the album as well. On all the other albums, the regular song pages were redirected to the album, but the pages for the singles remained. So why are they redirected for this one? I don't know what WP:whatever it's under, but it seems that singles get their own pages, right?

--Rock Soldier 21:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

A good point. Altogether seven songs were merged per AfD, including Seek & Destroy. I've merged Metal Militia per above and Am I Evil is still a separate artcile. Nevrtheless, the closing admin also merged the singles "Jump in the Fire" and "Whiplash", but I do indeed not see consensus for that. I think also the nominator deliberately did not list them for deletion. So I'll restore them and leave a note. --Tikiwont 09:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's a reasonable assumption. However, I'm happy to take them both to AFD though. I do think that this is a little silly on your behalf, because wide ranging consensus showed that they should have been merged. - Ta bu shi da yu 14:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Speaking as the person who nominated the non-singles at AfD, my intent was to do something (deletion was my plan, but redirecting was what happened) about the album tracks alone. The singles I'm prepared to let slide for the moment, and someone else can pass an eagle eye over them in due course to see what the sourcing is like. Were I to have come upon the discussions as the closing admin, I would have interpreted the consensus as being that those particular songs should be dealt with, not the entire album. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, now that we've merged and redirected all the pages, can someone tell me why now we're no longer allowed to even make links in the article to the part of it where the merged song articles were put?

--Rock Soldier (talk) 03:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Metallica thrash metal?

This is news to me. Is there a source for this description? Gatoclass 08:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

You've got to be kidding, right? --82.29.85.193 00:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

You might have missed something, because Metallica is often stated as one of the four great thrashers of the 1980's along with Megadeth, Anthrax and Slayer (if I remember correct) Chrown (talk) 19:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

To clarify this exchange, this album resides in the 'Thrash Metal' genre - although Metallica's creative direction has led them to pastures new since. The band were 'genre-defining' during this period and this particular album had a clearly distinguishable formative effect on the emerging sub-type of Heavy Metal under discussion. During the passage of time since the album's release in 1983, Metallica's style has evolved and now seems somewhat at odds with this label. However, it is entirely correct that their part in the birth of Thrash Metal should be documented in this article, as the article relates to a period in the band's history when the descriptor was accurate and credit should be given for their contribution. Ajono 10:04, 11 October 2008 (BST)

Re: Metallica Thrash Metal?

This album is certainly a thrash metal album, although Metallica's later albums (The Black Album onwards) aren't thrash metal albums, no.

BTW This is an amazing album, the best album ever. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pez17 (talk • contribs) 16:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The Neckbrace Remix of Whiplash - Incorrect statement!

I just read in the article, under singles, that Ulrich has stated that the special Neckbrace remix of Whiplash featured on the single is the same as the original version from the album. Firstly I don't think he said that, but that i don't know. On the other hand i know that there actually is a quite clear difference between the Neckbrace Remix from the single and the standard one from the album. I can tell since I own the very original rare Megaforce Records release of the 12" Whiplash vinyl-single AND Kill 'Em All album (both CD and LP) and I can tell that there is quite obvious a difference. The drums sound a lot more lifeless, thin and "far away" on the Neckbrace remix than the album, where the drums thunder a bit more. Everything else sounds quite the same on both versions though. Wether Ulrich has stated that they were the exactly same version I can't tell, but I can say for sure that they not are the same. If anyone can find out if Ulrich has said that they were the same or not... Chrown (talk) 19:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I think I'm gonna go ahead and create an article for "Seek & Destroy"

If you object, please give me a few reasons not to create an article for this song. It's been used in various media and is of particular note in Metallica's early discography. It practically symbolizes the group's debut. If one song from Kill 'Em All deserves an article, it's "Seek & Destroy." Cale (talk) 04:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

• I made a page for it a while ago. I put lots of time into a comprehensive page, but for some reason it was deleted because I, apparently, can't create a page for a Metallica song unless it's a single, which is pure bullshit in my opinion. Really, there are plenty of pages for their songs that aren't singles. I'm going to recreate the page and if it's deleted again, please give me a good reason other than that. If that is the only reason I'm giving, then explain to me why there is a page for "The Call of Ktulu", "To Live is to Die", and "The God That Failed". Whiffle Ball Tony (talk) 22:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

All the band's non-singles were voted to be re-directs. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 23:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

• Then explain to me "The Call of Ktulu". Whiffle Ball Tony (talk) 19:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, good point. By the way, the two singles from Kill 'Em All that do have articles have very shitty ones. Hell, the section for "Seek & Destroy" within the Kill 'Em All article is far longer than both KEA single articles put together. I'd like to see Whiffle Ball Tony's "Seek & Destroy" article resurrected. Cale (talk) 05:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

• It would be very nice to get at least some more discussion on this topic. I don't see why anyone should have an issue with this article.Whiffle Ball Tony (talk) 23:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The Four Horsemen

I see Kirk Hammet got a credit in this song in the article, does he get it in the album? If not it must be deleted, isn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.92.4.61 (talk) 01:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

About the Blitzkrieg Cover Credits

One of the songs added as b-sides in the 1988 reissue is called "Blitzkrieg" originally created by Blitzkrieg itself and that is Jones/Sirotto/Smith not Hetfield/Hammet, just checking —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alternativeware (talk • contribs) 23:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Whiplash at the Dentist?

I'm fairly certain that the description of what the song "Whiplash" means, apparently it's about James' fear of the dentist, is complete crap. I don't see any citation so I think I'm just going to delete that. 153.104.114.116 (talk) 16:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)