Talk:Folk metal

The Rewrite

I have been meaning to do this for a long while but I have not been able to find the time to embark on such a major re-write until today. I imagine that those familiar with folk metal would probably agree with what I have written but I probably need to add more links to verify some statements here and there. Hopefully, I will have some more free time in the near future to do so. Any feedback would be welcomed. And oh ... if I can figure out how to add some pictures, I would too. --Anarchodin 07:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted the edits made by User:Anarchodin, because he had removed a few sections apart from some useful information as well. If you want to rewrite/revamp the article, don't remove whole sections but add to the article. And please discuss changes to be made at the talk page before making them, especially if they are major changes. --NRS | ^T/_M\^B 09:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I guess I wasted my time then. So sorry about it. I did not realized I was not allowed to edit a page before seeking permission from a cabal. I suppose you are upset because I took out the section on Vedic Metal in particular, something that someone else on this talk page suggested should be done. Odd that other users can easily remove an entire section on pirate metal without any problems. Fine. Whatever. I'm not going to get into a revert war with you. --Anarchodin 15:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I decided to restore my rewrite as well as the dubious sections on Vedic Metal and Folk Ambient Metal that I had removed. See below for discussion on that topic. The only other section that is missing in my rewrite is the one on popularity. I could have rewrote it and included it in, certainly, but I'm a bit uncertain as to whether the information there can be verified. A couple of people have made some edits since the revert and I've tried to include their edits into my rewrite (eg. mention of darkwave, influence on skyclad and the two images) but I was not able to include everything. I'll leave it to them to see if they can make more additions. Hope nobody mind my revision now since I've left that section on Vedic Metal in place. --Anarchodin 08:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin

The proto-folk metal song "Over The Hills And Far Away" by Led Zeppelin should be mentioned somewhere, or is that "folk-rock". If this does not belong as being somehow homologous, then it should be mentioned and have a folk-rock link. - sonofoson

I don't think so unless you can find a verifiable link between Over The Hills And Far Away and contemporary folk metal bands. There are many other songs that could be interpreted as "proto-folk metal" but unless there is some significance relationship between the song and the actual genre of music, I do not think it should be included. Just my opinion. --Anarchodin 07:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Not Black Metal

Folk Metal ain't no Black Metal ... --Zenogantner

It is, it's core sound is black metal and folk of any given country mixed.

no it's not... while i agree that there are lots of folk (black) metal bands around (cruachan from ireland, all those finnish bands like finntroll, moonsorrow, etc.), german folk metal bands like subway to sally and in extremo don't have any black metal influences. same goes for the originators of folk metal, skyclad. while their debut was a thrash album with folk influences, their metal influences nowadays are more "classic metal" bands like thin lizzy or uriah heep. no black metal influence on any of their albums, sorry...

Folk Metal is not limited to black metal, but a good portion of the genre belongs in that category. Black metal, more than any other subgenre, has really warmed to folk influence.

I agree that black metal has embraced a great deal of folk metal, that does not make folk and black metal the same. You do not consider Flogging Molly, to keep to the Celtic theme, traditional Celtic simply because it uses influences, in the same way folk metal should not be seen as black metal.

What? Flogging Molly is a punk/folk mix, it's Folk Metal we're talking about here. It is not said Folk Metal should be seen as Black Metal though, the only Folk Metal bands we're talking about are Folk, Black/Folk, Folk/Thrash, Pagan Metal etc. Punk is not Metal at all. And i don't see what some of the other bands you mentioned have to do with the "Folk Metal" genre. Darksteel 14:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that was his/her point...

Folk came much before black metal, therefore it is independent of influence from metal holistically as a genre. Folk metal however can have many influences, not specifically black metal, otherwise it would be labelled "folk black metal", right?

Indeed, but that doesn't change anything to the fact the Folk Metal bands have a lot of Black Metal influence. Don't forget it's folk METAL! Nowadays and since whenever the Folk Metal genre has exploded, the tag at the back of Folk Metal is usually Black. Darksteel 14:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Folk metal is very often deeply influenced by black metal. And let's not forget that Quorthon (Bathory) pioneered both black- and folk/viking metal genres. Deep Bathory influences can be seen in e.g. Moonsorrow's music. And since folk metal often handles anti-christian themes one can't deny the "black influences". But let's not generalize anyway... BobHope88 19:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Folk Metal is NOT exceptionally influenced by Black metal, one of the earliest celtic metal songs is *arguably* 'Emerald' by Thin Lizzy, no black metal influences there.As for bands in the Celtic Metal

genre = Cruachan , Mael Mordha , Waylander ;they have been influnced by Black metal in as much a sense as theyve been influenced by any other rock/metal related genre but that doesnt make them rooted in black metal.I accept that there are some folk metal Bands that are heavily influenced by black metal but its the exception rather than the rule.PreachanStoirm 05:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Would like to point out that Mael Mórdha has been influenced by Doom Metal and not Black Metal at all, and as an Irishman I would disagree that Irish/Celtic folk metal is black metal based (even though not called it, it could be argued that Thin Lizzy and before them the Horslips were playing this while Martin Walkyier was still in nappies). Muiris Ó Suilleabháin 16:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Genre Samples

Added genre samples. I think those songs give an idea of the range of folk-metal, as well as the sounds of three of the most popular/important bands. --KharBevNor 11:17, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Argumentum ad populum; popularity does not define importance.

True, but it might be an influence. Also i believe most Folk Metal bands are fairly unknown... Darksteel 14:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Medieval Rock ?

Is Folk Metal identical to de:Mittelalter Rock (Medieval Rock)?

In Extremo is most definitely Medieval Rock and most Medieval Rock bands hardly have any Metal in them at all (but are definitely NOT Folk, as German "Medieval" bands use mostly historical lyrics from a variety of (mostly European) origins and play them with various musical styles ranging from somewhat authentic German medieval music (tweaked for the modern listener's taste, usually with influences from Irish Folk) to Metal or even Rap (de:Schelmish did two songs with heavy Rap influences)).

Folk Metal.. If they hardly have any metal in them they shouldn't really be mentioned. Might need another place in this article. Darksteel 14:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Many Medieval Rock bands have their origins in Irish Folk and then developed into the general direction of Metal (Subway to Sally being a prominent example), but most of them are much closer to Rock than to Metal and incorporate medieval German instruments as well as those found in Irish Folk and Metal, oftenly disbanding Irish Folk altogether and picking up songs (and poetry) of a variety of languages (In Extremo alone have performed songs in a variety of living, old or extinct European languages, including the prominent and re-occuring Merseburger Zaubersprüche which are historical "magical formulas" in what is described as "kitchen Latin").

Most Folk Metal bands are metal. Certainly the black/folk ones, and there is lots of them. Darksteel 14:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Apparently "Medieval Rock" is the more common term in the Germanophone countries, "Folk Metal" being more accepted in Anglophone countries (probably because the English term "Folk" is used in German to describe Irish Folk (almost) exclusively, and medieval German music being hardly ever considered to be strongly related to that).

--Ashmodai 5 July 2005 17:06 (UTC)

Also, amazingly enough, many German followers of Medieval Rock come from the Goth scene (Gothic Rock, Dark Wave, Dark Pop, etc) rather than being the typical Irish Folk or Metal listeners (predominant audience fashion: black leather or Goth dresses, and the odd white retro-barroque shirt). (PS: I should really begin to use preview until I'm certain I have nothing left to add) --Ashmodai 5 July 2005 17:24 (UTC)

For a quick definition of folk metal, see bnrmetal.com. The clear godfather of Folk Metal is Skyclad, who started mixing Celtic material with serious thrash metal sounds in the early 1990's. The others started adopting folk influences afterward. --208.134.236.150

That wasn't very helpful. I think that Folk Metal and Medieval Metal (or Medieval Rock) are very similar in style but come from different directions. While Folk Metal probably originates in Metal, Medieval Metal mostly comes from the Medieval scene (coincidentally or not, many people in the Medieval scene (in Europe, at least) are metalheads or Goths).

Very much agreed. Folk Metal has most of it's roots in the extreme metal genres, while Medieval Rock hasn't. Darksteel 14:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Since when is Skyclad an extreme metal band?

The mix of Celtic/Folk music and Metal has probably developed seperately from the inclusion of Metal and Goth elements in Medieval (market) music (which I haven't found outside Germany -- in the UK and elsewhere Celtic/Irish Folk seems to be more established, culturally and historically, whereas the European medieval music (of which there are many German/Latin texts) is largely unknown).

I'd wager that the Celtic/Folk trend of Metal is related to the wide use of Scandinavian/Celtic symbology (runes especially) throughout the Metal scene, whereas the Metal trend in Medieval (market) music is the inverse.

But as I said, I don't know of any examples for the Medieval Rock phenomenon outside Germany and the two genres may be mostly identical even if they are not directly related. -- Ashmodai 21:58, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

No absolutely not

-Whether or not they came from different roots there is definitely crossover and so mention should be made.

New Sub-section

I have added a sub-section on Vedic Metal, since an independent article is not feaseble. Vedic metal is gaining incredible popularity and Wikipedia cannot afford to ignore that. I've added the information which is best to my knowledge. New Rock Star 11:50, 14 December 2005

At least someone cares. They deleted the article twice! --Dangerous-Boy 04:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay ... but since when did classical music became synonymous with folk? Or are we just assuming all non-western music to be folk? --Anarchodin 09:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow. Now Folk Metal is part of a Wikiproject on Hinduism. WTF?

Just Vedic metal part.--Dangerous-Boy 06:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I've heard Vedic Metal. Nothing to do with Folk music, let alone folk metal. Anarchodin 11:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

That means it should be deleted. Darksteel 14:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Done. My advice for fans of Vedic Metal is to include it as a subgenre of Death Metal. I reckon that would be more accurate than supposing it has anything to do with folk music. --Anarchodin 07:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Wait a minute...if Vedic Metal doesn't belong here, then neither does Viking Metal! How comes having Viking imagery instantly makes a band Folk Metal, but having Vedic lyrics doesn't?--DarkPresence 23:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Because many Viking Metal bands are also Folk Metal bands but no Vedic Metal band is Folk Metal? If you were to look at my rewrite, you would note that I did mentioned not all Viking Metal bands are Folk. Have you even tried searching for the term "Vedic Metal" over the internet? Half of the mere few hundred results are mere copies of this wiki page. If you search for the band Rudra over the internet, you'd get descriptions of the band as death metal rather than folk metal. The original page for Vedic Metal on Wikipedia did not mentioned anything about it being folk metal - only after that page was successfully nominated for deletion did we even see it crop up on this page. --Anarchodin 00:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Which Vedic Metal have you heard ? Just Rudra ? Take a chill pill, friend ! Listen to Asura, Advaita, Faith and other Vedic Metal bands. Perfectly Folk metal !! By the way, you're being too Eurocentric. Do you think only European folk is folk? Asian folk is not Folk ? This is Wikipedia, a global site, not a Western blog ! And that's why Vedic Metal will remain. It is really burgeoning in South and South East Asia, and there's no reason why it should be removed. So, please put away your Indophobia and work constructively. I am removing the disputed tag as I see nothing disputed in this. --NRS | ^T/_M\^B 04:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Indophobia? Ouch. I know you are an Indian but please do not assume that I am a European. I am from Singapore and have heard many of those bands that you call Vedic Metal. Nothing in the way of *folk* music there. Indian Classical music is not folk unless you wish to treat every non-European form of music as folk. If Vedic Metal is folk, then all the symphonic metal bands with their European classical leanings should be considered folk as well. You had a role in creating the Vedic Metal page and you are the one that added this Vedic Metal onto this Folk Metal page. Not surprising that you do not see any dispute in this. Again, I would point out that using a search engine like yahoo or google returns only a few hundred (500 - 700) results for the term Vedic Metal, many of which happen to be nothing more than copies of wikipedia. Comprehensive directories like the Metal Archives list those bands you list as death metal - not folk metal. Vedic Metal was even a page that was successfully nominated for deletion on wikipedia. For all that reasons, I do not see why it should be listed here on the Folk Metal page. I'm not being Indophobia. I recognize folk metal bands outside Europe but your precious Vedic Metal bands have nothing to do with *folk* music. Put them somewhere else on wikipedia if you really have to. --Anarchodin 08:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Here is a list of websites mentioning some of the bands you cite as Vedic Metal. All described as death metal or pagan metal with not a single mention of folk music on any of the pages. Some of these pages are the band's own websites. Some of them are from their record labels. Some of them are websites where anyone can listen to their music and make up their own mind. Do any of the bands even consider themselves folk metal?

Narasimha http://www.metal-rules.com/review/viewreview.php?month=March&year=2004&pos=32 http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=12925 http://www.geocities.com/dharmashetra/ http://www.tartareandesire.com/bands/narasimha.html http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=16889 http://www.metalreigns.com/reviews/156.html

Azrael http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=16889 http://www.myspace.com/azraelsg http://www.redstream.org/Azra-el-A-Prayer-From-the-Lips-of-Sin_RD7563.php

Advaita http://www.metal-archives.com/index.php http://www.spirit-of-metal.com/groupe-groupe-Advaita-l-en.html

Kaliyuga http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=12477 http://fly.to/kaliyuga http://www.bnrmetal.com/groups/kaly.htm http://steelmadness.tripod.com/issue03/interview/kaliyuga.html

Ugrakarma http://www.ktmrocks.com/interviews/03_sunil.htm http://www.tartareandesire.com/bands/ugrakarma.html

I could go on and on but I would hope that this is more than enough. With only one exception, all the Vedic Metal bands I've heard thus far are death metal with nary an element of folk. The exception was a black metal band with nary an element of folk. In fact, these bands do not even use the term Vedic Metal, let alone describe their music as folk metal. Websites, reviews, interviews, record labels - no mention of folk. Anyone can even use a p2p software to download their music and listen for themselves. No folk music. Not folk metal. --Anarchodin 08:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I support removal of both Vedic metal and Native American metal sections. These are unverifiable, non-notable and completely original research. "Vedic metal" is a term coined by one band (Rudra) to promote their music, and "Native American metal" gets only 90 unique Google results. Neologisms and protologisms don't belong to Wikipedia. Prolog 15:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Huh? I can understand why people would want to remove Vedic metal, but Native American metal? Like it or not, it IS Folk Metal. It fits the definition perfectly, and I can't think of a single reason to delete it from this page. And it's not any more of a neologism than 'Folk Ambient' or 'Celtic Metal'.--DarkPresence 19:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, "Native American metal" is even much more obscure term than "Vedic metal". Now that I looked at the Google results again, most of those 90 hits are even unrelated. In fact, the only related hits are of Wikipedia mirrors. The reasons for the removal are the ones I stated: WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:N. "Folk ambient" might need to go too, but celtic metal and especially viking metal are well-known and documented styles of music. Prolog 20:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

That's because they don't specifically use the term "Native American metal". Most of them refer to their music as "tribal", "indigenous" or even simply as Folk Metal. Look up "Tribal metal" on Google; I'm sure you're bound to find more results.--DarkPresence 00:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Native American Metal and Oriental Metal might be terms that are unnecessary and rarely used but the important difference they have with Vedic Metal is that those bands that have been tagged as Native American Metal and Oriental Metal are actually Folk Metal bands with a significant degree of folk elements in the music. The Vedic Metal bands that have been cited are anything but folk. Straightforward death metal mostly. No folk melodies, no folk rhythms, no folk instruments or even synths duplicating folk sounds. Nada, zip, zero. The only reason why Vedic Metal has managed to stay so long on this Folk Metal page is because most people have not even heard of the mentioned Vedic Metal bands, let alone their music. --Anarchodin 08:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone know whether it is possible to nominate a single section of an article for deletion (as opposed to the entire article)? I've been looking for an answer but have not been able to find any. --Anarchodin 08:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I rather have vedic metal in it's own article.--D-Boy 16:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

So would I but the problem with the original article - the one that was successfully nominated for deletion - was that it gave a picture of vedic metal as a subgenre of heavy metal music and in the midst of all sorts of nonsensical fictitious genres, it was easily shot down and removed. Rightly so because it is not a subgenre of heavy metal anymore than christian metal is. Yet christian metal does have its own article. A poorly written article at the moment but still an article of its own. Significantly, it does not appear on the metal infobox but on the christian music infobox because the merit of the subject is not as a subgenre of heavy metal but an example of christian music. If you want an article on vedic metal, you need to paint it as an example of indian music, of indian involvement in heavy metal, as a cultural product of the global indian diaspora community - not as a subgenre of heavy metal because there is little to set the *music* of vedic metal bands apart from other heavy metal bands. In fact, there already exist an entry on vedic metal on the indian rock page so it's not as if removing it from this folk metal page would result in it being completely absent from Wikipedia. Now, can you be so kind as tell me what exactly on this folk metal page needs referencing that the earlier version did not? --Anarchodin 05:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

If vedic metal is removed, then the rest of the related folk metals styles should be removed. Celtic metal has crap going for it. The whole article doesn't even cite sources. Folk Ambient Metal and native american metal have even less written about it. Since like a bad faith edit just to remove vedic metal. I've listened to RUdra, and it's very metal. The disputed tag should go under the whole related folk metal section.--D-Boy 07:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course, Rudra is very much metal but that's not the dispute now, is it? It's about FOLK metal, mate. Rudra is not folk. The other Vedic Metal bands are not folk either. Those bands cited as celtic metal, native american and oriental metal are folk - regardless of whether the terms are dubious are not. The Folk Ambient stuff I do not agree with either and would like to see it removed too but I have enough problems getting vedic metal removed as it is. This is not an article about heavy metal but folk metal. This is not an article about metal music as performed by any ethnic group regardless of musical content. This is an article about a particular style of metal music that incorporates folk music. Not indian lyrics. Folk music. Rudra is not folk. Ugrakarma is not folk. Narasimha is not folk. Azrael is not folk. Advaita is not folk. Kaliyuga is not folk. I've listened to all of these bands and more. I do not hear any folk whatsoever and I'm far from alone. None of those websites on these bands that I linked to above even mentioned folk metal, let alone the term vedic metal. None of these bands have any business being on a FOLK METAL page. Put them on the death metal page if it means so much to you.

As for sources, the article does cite some. It might not be perfect but it's better than the previous version - and you certainly did not bother to ask for references on the previous version. Not every sentence in the article needs citation so clue me in already and tell me what exactly you think needs references so I can look them up and add them. --Anarchodin 09:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree with D-Boy, Vedic Metal belongs here. I have heard Vedic Metal and it perfectly interspreds folk elements in its music. Rudra does have folk elements and so does Asura, and so does Warriors Of Peace and so does Faith. I guess, you havent listened to these bands Anachordin. And if combining death metal with folk isn't folk metal, then Bathory's mention doesn't belong here by that argument ! But, we know Bathory belongs here. And so does Rudra. There are many bands in India who are very much folk Vedic Metal. And so Vedic metal shall remain. --NRS | ^T/_M\^B 10:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, smart. Ignore the five bands that I have already provided evidence for as not being folk metal and bring up four other bands instead. I've said it before and I will say it again - the only reason why vedic metal has managed to exist so long on this folk metal page is because most people have not even heard of the bands you cite, let alone their music. Unfortunately for you, I have heard these bands and I challenge your interpretation of them as folk.

Here are some sites on Asura, none of which mention anything about folk music. I should point out that Asura is an unsigned band without even a real homepage beyond a myspace account. Anyone can listen to their music on the myspace page to judge the style for themselves.

http://radioverve.com/band/asura

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pageartist.cfm?bandID=534479

http://www.myspace.com/asura666

Warriors of Peace, I do not know. And how can I when they do not even have any presence on the internet (or p2p downloads) other than the mention of the band on wikipedia and numerous copies of wikipedia? Even the comprehensive Metal Archives have no mentioned of them (or the myspace band Asura, for that matter). Go ahead and find me a website that indicates their existence, let alone their style of music as folk metal.

Ditto Faith. I see a mention of them on a blog but that's about it.

The only band you mentioned with even a bare touch of ethnic elements is Rudra, a band from my home country and whose music I know quite well. Not that difficult to find music by Rudra on the internet either. But you are only person I have come across that think them a folk metal band - and I don't recall you thought that was the case before the original Vedic Metal page was deleted and you had to find some other page on wikipedia to mention vedic metal. Yes, they do have shades of indian classical music. I do not know why you as an indian would even want to think your indian classical music is the same thing as folk music. You don't hear europeans metal fans describing symphonic metal bands as folk metal. Rudra's own website does not mention anything about folk music. Reviews and interviews consistently use the term death metal to describe their music and not folk metal. Even the wikipedia page on Rudra puts them in the context of death metal and not folk metal! Of course, a band can be both death and folk but one would imagine that if they were folk, someone other than you would mention it somewhere other than on wikipedia.

I do not know what article you have been reading but nowhere on wikipedia is there any description of Bathory as a folk metal band. They are described as a viking metal band that have exercised a great deal of influence on folk metal bands so bringing them up into the discussion would be to raise a strawman.

One of the other bands mentioned on the main article I might actually consider as folk metal. Not the others and not vedic metal as a whole. Regardless, the user Prolog above is absolutely right that Vedic Metal falls under the claim of unverifiable, non-notable and completely original research. You are talking about myspace bands that do not even have their own website, let alone a recording deal. Is there even anyone else other than you and your fellow fellow wikipedian D-Boy that would consider these bands and vedic metal in general to be folk metal? Do you yourself even believe this or are you just desperate to promote vedic metal? After all, it was not until a few days after the original vedic metal page was deleted that you added vedic metal into this folk metal page. Why was it not done earlier if you really thought that they were folk metal? I strongly doubt that either you or D-Boy are going to relent on your position and any removal of vedic metal on this page would only result in a revert by either one of you. I've been trying to be nice and patient but quite frankly, I'm not happy about this situation in the least bit. --Anarchodin 15:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I suggest redirecting (or merging, if some it can be verified) Vedic metal to Rudra (band) and then removing it from this article. It obviously doesn't suit well here. The term is coined by Rudra and this supposed "genre" doesn't have other notable bands. As mentioned above, it seems like self-promotion for a whole bunch on non-notable death metal acts. Prolog 20:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Nile

Nile page

while they arent from Egypt and dont sing about present day egyptian culture its clear the theme of all their music is ancient egyptian culture and folklore, i believe they should be added to the list of folk metal bands.

is their music significantly based on Egyptian style music, or do they just add some middle-eastern keyboards every now and then? I don't know their music well.

That's sort of the litmus test of folk metal. Rhapsody incorporate celtic sounding flutes every now and then for atmosphere but that doesn't change the fact that they are elf-metal, not folk-metal.

Elf-metal? I don't thinkt there's need for that. :P Rhapsody are Italian Power Metal. Darksteel 14:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm pretty sure Nile is considered to be death metal. Their albums have an egyption influence definately, but the end result seems more like death metal to me.

Yeah, Nile is most definately Brutal Death Metal. They have the Egyptian sounds but have nothing to do with the Folk Metal genre. Darksteel 14:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Likewise, Rudra and vedic metal really. --Anarchodin 15:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Edits

Vintersorg, finntroll, otyg

what are they doing together with those other bands? Vintersorg is most definately completely different from those other ones, and so is Fintroll - they play Folk Metal with Polka influences.

edit: Caught me to it. I only heard Versus the World at the time. Darksteel 13:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

New Subgenre

The article in question has since ben deleted.

Removed Sections

I removed all the sections here that are clones of other AFD'd articles, neoglisms, original research, are not metal, and have consensus to be removed from this talk page.

I don't recall seeing any consensus on anything on this talk page but regardless, my only question is why medieval rock? The subheading of the article is Related Styles not Subgenres so there's really no reason why a non-metal style that is related could not be featured there. There's a lengthy discussion above on this talk page with a number of people who clearly think that some mention of medieval rock could be made. If you had read the section, it clearly stated that a number of these medieval rock bands have crossed over to folk metal. This is recognized by many people and such medieval rock bands as In Extremo and Tanzwut are frequently found on websites catering to folk metal, including those that I provided links for at the end of the article.

I would also like to point out that if you are going to removed all those stuff, you might as well removed the various tags on the top of the article and the talk page that becomes irrelevant as soon as you removed the stuff on vedic metal. --Anarchodin 14:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Just to elaborate further, a number of these medieval rock bands have been added by others to the list of folk metal bands, including In Extremo, Tanzwut, Subway to Sally and Haggard. The main article for In Extreme describes them as a folk metal band with Mittelalter-Rock only mentioned in the band's infobox. In contrast, Folk Metal is mentioned in the infobox for Subway to Sally. The metal archives list a large number of medieval rock bands as folk metal, including In Extremo and Subway to Sally as well as a number of lesser known groups such as Finisterra. The so-called Encyclopedia Folkceltica also lists In Extremo as a folk metal band. The german site folkmetal includes medieval rock bands in their umbrella of folk, viking, pagan and medieval. And so on and so forth. Obviously, there exists a fairly large overlap. Why not mentioned this overlap under the heading of related style? It's not as if rock and metal has no relationship whatsoever.

And another thing. Why did you left Oriental Metal in? Not that I mind. I just find it odd that you would removed the other neologisms but not Oriental metal. --Anarchodin 14:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Mittleater rock doesnt, from what i read, have anything more unique about it than it being the name for Folk Metal in Germany. If the section would be kept - it should do better than to shamelessly advertise a few german bands.

And its not anymore of an overlap than Folk Rock and Folk Metal. It specifcally says actually its a combination of Folk Rock and Gothic Rock. That belongs on the Folk Rock page.

And as for the tags, they werent on my mind as i forgot about them. Not something i normally do.

Well, you're wrong mate. Obviously, you have not heard these medieval rock bands. They are not synonymous with folk rock. Musically, these medieval rock bands are closer to Dead Can Dance than the Pogues. More neo-medieval than rock, I would think. The fact is that there do exist an overlap and many people do see a number of these medieval rock bands as folk metal. I do not see how the section shamelessly advertise a few german bands. It simply described the music style briefly before mentioning the overlap between folk metal and these medieval rock bands, providing a few examples in the process. How does that brief paragraph shamelessly advertise bands more than any other paragraph on this article?

There is no corresponding overlap between Folk Metal and Folk Rock as there is between Folk Metal and Medieval Rock. Medieval rock has its own page here on wikipedia - it is not even mentioned at all under the folk rock page here on wikipedia and that is because it is a distinct style unto its own. So what if the description of medieval rock is that of a combination of folk rock and gothic rock? Folk metal is described as a combination of heavy metal and folk music but you do not see folk metal mentioned on either of those pages. That does not mean folk metal is synonymous with heavy metal any more than medieval rock is synonymous with folk rock.

I do not know why you are making such a big deal about this. You should not be making conclusions on music styles that you have not heard before, only read about. I have provided a number of links indicating the presence of such an overlap. Many people do recognise this overlap. This is not original research. I think it clearly obvious really that there should be a mention of this crossover and I do not see why you have a problem with the presence of such a mention. As if we cannot see the word rock on a page devoted to folk metal? --Anarchodin 04:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

First off, see WP:NPA. Then realise i listen to a majority of those bands. Then realise that your whole point of Medieval Rock not being synomous with Folk Rock applies to what i removed and Folk Metal. Its not one rule for one and another rule for another.

Ouch? Was I attacking you? Since when was an assumption that you did not listen to these bands a personal attack? I based that assumption on your own statement which indicate your familiarity of the subject as a matter of reading rather than listening. Quite frankly, I think you are the one here who has been anything but civil in your behavior. You are basically ignoring everything I have written on medieval rock. With this last statement of yours, you are effectively just saying that all my arguments in favor of the inclusion of medieval rock is really an argument in favor of your stance - without even bothering to elaborate upon this. What am I supposed to do? Just agree with you merely because you said so? Not only are you ignoring what I have to say but you are ignoring other wikipedians as if you have some sort of binding authority over this article. You deleted the stuff on vedic metal et al without establishing any consensus WP:CON - not that I really mind because I've been trying to get rid of those stuff myself. But you also delete the stuff on medieval rock without establishing any consensus WP:CON either. I have repeatedly made arguments in favor of including the short paragraph in the article but you have repeatedly ignored all the reasons I provided. You also ignore the expressed preferences of other wikipedians on this talk page above on this very subject. If you do not want to go about holding up WP:NPA as a shield, then perhaps you ought to start communicating instead of assuming some special right on your part to decide what belongs on the article. I stand by my view that there is no reason why medieval rock should not be mentioned as a mere paragraph on this article as a related style when there is plenty of evidence that many people all over the world recognise a relationship between the two genre. --Anarchodin 14:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

First off. Most of its WP:NOR. Second, its rock, not metal. Thus its on the wrong article. Not saying scrap it, saying move it to another article. Third, its no more a related style than Jazz is to Gothic Metal. Related style to Rock - specifically Folk Rock and Gothic Rock. And second, WP:CON doesnt matter much when the section is contrivy of WP:CITE.

I have already addressed all your claims but you are ignoring all my points. Do I really have to repeat myself again?

1. Since when was it not allowed for a rock genre to be mentioned on a metal article as a related style? Hard rock, glam rock, punk rock and alternative rock are all mentioned on the Heavy Metal article as related styles. Hard rock is also listed as a related genre on the Classic Metal page. Hardcore punk is mentioned on the Death Metal article. Industrial rock is mentioned on the Industrial metal article. Progressive rock is mentioned on the Progressive Metal page. Gothic rock is mentioned on the Gothic metal page. So I ask you since when was it ever considered wrong for a rock genre to be mentioned on a metal article? As if there is no relationship between rock and metal whatsoever.

2. The relationship between medieval rock and folk metal is large enough for many people to recognize it. A number of bands are commonly described as both medieval rock and folk metal bands, including a few right here on wikipedia itself - In Extremo, Tanzwut, Subway To Sally and Haggard are all listed under both categories. It is simply ridiculous to suggest that the relationship between medieval rock and folk metal is not greater than the relationship between jazz and gothic metal. That is just nonsense. Electric guitars with metal riffs, traditional instruments with traditional melodies - the overlap is so bleeding obviously that I strongly doubt your claims now to have listened to these medieval rock bands.

3. Original research? I have already brought up numerous instances found over the world wide web that provide ample evidence that many people recognize the existence of this relationship. The examples I have provided included the metal archives website, the encyclopedia folkceltica website and the german folkmetal.de website. There are many other websites. This rockdetector website describes Subway to Sally as both folk metal and medieval rock. This EOL website describes In Extremo as both folk metal and medieval rock. Countless review websites mention the same thing, including this one at roughedge and this one at metal observer. Countless forum websites similarly indicate a widespread recognition of an overlap including this thread at trolleve and even this very talk page on wikipedia right above. So how exactly is this original research when all these websites and many more indicate an overlap?

4. It makes no difference whatsoever whether medieval rock is related to folk rock or not. The article in question is folk metal and there is no reason why a rock genre cannot be mentioned as a related style on a metal article. I have provided ample evidence that there is a relationship between medieval rock and folk metal. It's not original research.

5. Consensus is an issue when you are ignoring all points contrary to your belief. Citation is not an issue when I have clearly demonstrated that this is anything but original research. What makes you so special that you can ignore all other wikipedians and exercise an authority in deciding what belongs on the folk metal article? --Anarchodin 05:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

1: Each of those genres as a direct link to what it mentions.

2: In Extremo - Vollmond. Love the video, specially the part where he pulls the dude out of the suitcase, then staps him to a chair and is gonna stab him in the neck with a stake. Lovely. Oh, and if it was metal, it would be called Medieval Metal, not Medieval Rock. The only way youd get that on there, is in one specific scenario. If Medieval Rock was a specific name given to a regional scene of Folk Metal. Then you could add it, and rename the section Thematic And Regionwise Variations of Folk Metal.

3: Erm, read them more carefully. It says they played one, and then the other. Not both at the same time. Thats like saying a band plays Gothic Rock and Gothic Metal at the same time because both are listed in the genre box.

4: Never said you couldnt mention Folk Metal and Medieval Rock without a 'direct link'. So far, the only link youve offered is 'some' bands played one, then the other. Again, see my answer to point 3.

5: Youve got sources, thats good. Glad we have progressed. But, however, misreading and misrepresenting the information they provide completely undermines your argument. I dont tend to take complete violations of whats not allowed into consideration as a good argument. I also ignore strawman arguments.

Ive told you how to get it on. Told yew how it will work, if that connection is there. Otherwise i dont waste time with strawman arguments.

Actually i just noticed. Youve been doing the same thing here as you tried on the Symphonic Metal article, by trying to claim the bands are Symphonic Gothic Metal and creating genres that do not exist because you disliked the fact Symphonic Metal has its own article. Do you make a habit of trying to create genres and links between genres that dont exist?

The bands in question have in fact been described as being both folk metal and medieval rock simultaneously by a number of the links I have provided - but I do not see what relevance this even have. You seem to think that the argument here is that medieval rock is a subgenre of folk metal, expecting medieval rock to be named medieval metal instead. Why is it so difficult for you to understand the concept of related style as opposed to subgenre?

For some reason, you actually remind me a great deal of the infamous Leyasu character. This attempt of yours to smear my name is really quite unnecessary. I have never attempted to create a fictitious genre. On the contrary, I have consistently been questioning the existence of various genres, including pirate metal, vedic metal and yes, symphonic metal - which I felt was a biased privilege of some metal bands over others. I gave up on the symphonic metal page because of this Leyasu character and you know what, I'm giving up on this folk metal page because of you. Congratulations, you've won. Your dictatorial behavior on has put me off wikipedia. So go on ahead and control this folk metal page like it's your own personal property. I try to be nice and converse at great lengths with people in an attempt to resolve disputes yet you have established far more success by ignoring the opinions of other people and arbitrarily awarding yourself the ultimate authority on what's allowed on this page. I feel I have written more than enough for people to see the merits on my side of the argument. I'm not going to waste any more of my time with you. --Anarchodin 04:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, how bloody silly of me. You are in fact Leyasu. Taking a look at the contributions you've made with the ip address you are currently reveals that I'm not even the only one that think so. Sockpuppets, sockpuppets. What a miserable and pathetic excuse for human being you are. --Anarchodin 04:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

No personal attacks it says right there. And yes, i ignore opinions because if you read here, it says opinions dont go in articles. Sources = in. Related link = in. Misrepresenting sources + trying to create links = not in. See how this works?

I asked yew a simple question: Is what yew want in a specific regionwise or thematic subgenre of Folk Metal. If its not, it doesnt go in. And your sources say they 'have' played both. The Gathering 'have' played Gothic Metal, but now they play Alternative Rock based music.

Again, either find sources that claim what you claim and then work to improve tehe article. Or quit doing what yew tried to do on the Symphonic Metal article and create genres and relations that dont exist.

At least you are not even denying that you are the infamous Leyasu. What would the point be after all when it is so blatantly obvious? My involvement on the symphonic metal article was such a minor thing that only you would think it worth mentioning. Your revert wars on other articles following the exact same pattern and preferences that you have long ago established under the Leyasu moniker.

You really should not be one to talk about following wikipedia policies when you have been repeatedly banned from taking part on this site. Seriously, what kind of miserable wretch are you that you would still persist in spending so much time on wikipedia when you are so clearly unwelcomed here? Why do you bother with using sockpuppets? Is this really so important to you? Are you addicted to wikipedia? Get a life. --Anarchodin 10:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Again, ill remind you, WP:NPA, and thats the last friendly warning. Second, im only unwelcome by the people who disagree with me, or try to break Wikipedia's policys continously. Consider me an Anti Hero.

And, my behaviour shouldnt denote yours - if i stick my hand in the fire, that normally means you shouldnt. As such, im reknown for being a complete bitch by people who dont follow the policys and try to stall article progression with straw man arguments. I just cut the cheese, serve, and move onto the crackers.

As such, what im saying here is simple, ill bulletpoint it for you, so you can look at it without involving the personal issues:

• Make a Thematic And Regionwise Variations In Folk Metal section. Then, wack in all the thematic variations (Viking/Celtic/Troll), and the Regionwise ones (Native American/Oriental/Medieval Rock). Then, tidy each of the paragraphs up to say 'exactly' what it is.

That make it easier for ya? I hope so. Time spent arguing is wasted time that could be spent improving articles. Remember, Wikipedia is not a battleground.

Oh, so now you want to play nice and friendly with me. It's too late for that. I know full well what sort of character you are. I've seen your edits. I've seen your revert wars. I've seen the fuss you made. I've seen you getting banned from editing on wikipedia. Banned. Do you not understand what that means? Again, get a life. --Anarchodin 09:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

New Article??

Well considering that 'folk metal' encompases rather a diverse number of different styles of music , and given that genres like noise pop get their own article would anyone be willing to agree with me that individual articles should be created for the larger of the related genres of folk metal , ie viking metal, celtic metal and this page should be left to link to them all? thoughts ,responses? PreachanStoirm 05:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

They are here because their articles were already deleted.

Ignore the unregistered-yet-banned-from-wikipedia-troll above. Only Celtic Metal as a subgenre of folk metal was successfully nominated for deletion. Viking metal already has its own article. So does Oriental metal. Feel free to expand or improve either articles. It is difficult but not impossible to restore a page that has been deleted. If you really want Celtic Metal to have its own page for some reason, I would suggest writing a really good article whose merits would be immediately apparent. --Anarchodin 10:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Ironically, im not a troll. Only two users use that term to discribe me, and one has gone through arbirrition and is on a final ban warning, and the other previously caused trouble on another article tryign to push original research into it.

As current, Celtic Metal redirects here per the AFD vote. Thus if yew wish to create a new one i suggest using this page as a sandbox for it.

You have been BANNED from wikipedia. Stop editing these pages, troll. Are you so damn pathetic that you are addicted to wikipedia? Your latest edit is nothing short of ridiculous - medieval rock and neo-folk are not a variation of folk metal in the least bit. You yourself have been adamant that medieval rock should not appear on this folk metal page simply because it is not metal and yet now you change it from being a related style into a variation. No wonder nobody can stand you around wikipedia. Get a life. --Anarchodin 22:38, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Reverts

Prolog, thanks for reverting the changes that the troll made and thanks for correcting all the capitalization in the article. I did not realize there was a wikipedia policy on that issue.

Leyasu or whatever it is you want to call yourself, stop wasting your life on wikipedia. Your obsession with this website borders on psychopathic. Seek professional help. Find a counsellor. Or a psychologist. Someone to help you with your apparent inability to socialise or work with others. Someone to help you with your apparent inability to grasp the concept of being completely and utterly BANNED from wikipedia. Anymore edits from you and I will make a request for this page to be semi-protected. For your own sake, get a life. --Anarchodin 05:29, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Manual of Style didn't originally have a separate section for musical genres, but there is one now at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters)#Musical genres. Prolog 08:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Notice only two users on Wikipedia call Leyasu a Troll - both have been refuted by WP:HMM members several times. Oh, and calling Leyasu a Wikipedia obbsessive is kinda lame when you cyberstalk their edits. Oh, and last warning, WP:NPA.

You are talking about yourself in the third person now? It is just bloody ironic that you would even cite wikipedia policies when you have been completely and utterly banned from editing on wikipedia. --Anarchodin 02:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Leyasu

I don't know what's your intent, and I might even be wasting my time trying to communicate with you, but we definitely have to get things straight. You obviously want to turn this into a revert war, but you have yet to give a valid explanation of your edit. I know you don't listen to opinions, but I'm simply asking you to listen to common sense:

1)"Medieval Rock" isn't a variation of Folk Metal and souldn't be listed as such. You even said it yourself: it's rock, not metal. It appears on this page because it's RELATED to Folk Metal, not because they are one and the same. 2)Neo-Folk isn't metal, let alone a variation of Folk Metal. I shouldn't even have to explain this one... 3)Viking Metal isn't a variation of Folk Metal. In fact, Viking Metal is simply a cross-genre reference for Viking-themed bands. Notice the "cross-genre" part... 4)Celtic Metal and Oriental Metal are not lyrical or regionwise variations, they are MUSICAL variations. They are classified as such because they merge metal with a different form of folk music. A lyrical variation is something more akin to Viking Metal or Christian Metal. A regionwise variation is something like Scandinavian death metal and such. Celtic Metal and Oriental Metal do not fit under this classification.

If you have any arguments to counter these points, feel free to respond. Better to discuss than to revert each other ad infinitum...--DarkPresence 16:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

And here is my reply:

• 1) Deleted - as yew said, rock, not metal. Oh, and the 'relation' that was convieniently 'created by Anarchodin', was that Medieval Rock is the name for German Folk Metal. Thus if that argument is refuted, its gone.

• 2) Deleted - Rock not Metal.

• 3) I know all about Cross-Genre Refs. I was the one who styled, derised, originated and moved the List of heavy metal genres article. Thus its a form of Folk Metal + Whatever. Viking Metal bands with Folk Metal roots are simply lyrical variations of Folk Metal (and with Folk Metal being any metal with folk themes, well, lest i say more). Thus, its a lyrical variation.

• 4) Celtic is a regional form of music. Regional Variation + Genre = Regionwise Variation. Oriental Metal is also a regionwise variation, as it uses Oriental (to us, folk to those countrys) Music + Genre. Thus a variation of the genre. Regionwise Variations can be done both musically AND lyrically.

Huh? What the...

• 1) The relation wasn't that Medieval Rock = Folk Metal. It was simply that sometimes there's a crossover between these styles, and some people tend to confuse the two. That relation certainly wasn't "created by Anarchodin", since people were already discussing it on this very talk page (see the "Medieval Rock?" section above), way before Anarchodin made his edit.

• 3) "...and with Folk Metal being any metal with folk themes..."-You

No. No way dude. Absolutely not. Not in a million years. No, just...no, ok? As the definition on this article says, Folk Metal is a combination of Metal and Folk MUSIC. It has nothing to do with themes. Hell, the freakin' INVENTORS of Folk Metal, Skyclad, had zilch to do with folk themes in their lyrics. And Bathory's Blood Fire Death, although embracing folk themes, is not mentionned as a Folk Metal album on this page. You know why? Because it doesn't have any Folk music, that's why. Folk Metal is defined by its musical components, period. On the other hand, Viking Metal is a thematic reference that can apply to any genre, thus many Viking Metal bands have absolutely nothing to do with Folk Metal, musically speaking. It's a lyrical variation of Metal, but it's not specific to Folk Metal. Get it?

• 4) Funny how you consider Celtic Metal a regional scene, when one of its most important bands hails from freaking Brazil! Not only Celts can play Celtic music, you know. I sort of understand your point, but the term "regionwise variation" is very misleading IMO. Same for Oriental Metal.--DarkPresence 02:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Viking music is a form of folk music - might wanna look that one up. Celtic music is a form of regional music - might wanna look that one up.

Oh and originally i did see we need to actually reword parts of the 'paragraphs' to be more clear and accurate instead of 'creating' relations and genres that dont exist.

Amazingly, your one of the first people who has stopped down to actually talk about the matter properly.

I had a long discussion on this matter with you, as evident on this talk page itself. But I gave up on trying to work peacefully with you after I discovered that you are none other than the infamous Leyasu, someone that has been banned from editing on wikipedia. What an amazingly thick skull you must have. --Anarchodin 02:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

In Flames and Gothenberg in general

I'm surprised no-one's mentioned Melodeath and In Flames, I mean with Jesper being a folk violinist, they have a very pronounced folk influence especially on their earlier albums (i.e. the songs Hargalaten and Gyroscope)...

Fair use rationale for Image:Hammerheart.jpg

Image:Hammerheart.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 05:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

At last, what is folk metal

is it black metal, power metal and heavy metal with folk instruments or is it just lyrical-theme based?

pagan

pagan metal isn't a subgenre of folk metal. pagan metal uses often folk melodies but that's not necessary. Pagan metal is defined by its lyrical content mostly heathen mythology, wotanism, slavonic history, germanic/celtic culture. The most pagan metal bands sound like melodic black metal, so it is NOT Folk Metal. mfg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.226.49.52 (talk) 16:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Artists mentioned in article

Someone needs to go through this article and start trimming out bands mentioned. You really only need one maybe 2 examples. Some paragraphs are being over run with links to band articles. Ridernyc (talk) 08:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Removed Subgenre Section

A few days ago, I started working on this article with the intention of just adding in citations where possible. There were no references on the article before I started work on it. In the process, I had to make some heavy rewrite of the article, removing sentences that I could not references for and altering other sentences to fit in with the references that I could find. I also took out the entire section on subgenre. Which was not a lot. Just a couple of short paragraphs, one for Celtic metal and one for Oriental metal. I simply thought that this was really unnecessary. All the section did was gave examples of bands that perform Celtic or Oriental metal. I think these terms are fairly self-explanatory. It's not as if anyone hearing the term Celtic metal is going to think it's Korean classical music. There's no article on wikipedia for Celtic metal. There is one for Oriental metal so I inserted a link elsewhere in the article as compensation for my removal of the subgenre section. I also took out the paragraph on Neo-Folk under Related Styles. I don't think two bands, one of whom is no longer active, are a sufficient basis to assert that there's some sort of relationship between neo-folk and folk metal. There are also a couple of folk metal bands with a relationship to yoik music but nobody's going to create a paragraph on yoiking in an article on folk metal. --Bardin (talk) 12:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

there was a Celtic metal which was redirected here. I've changed that redirect to now point to Celtic rock which briefly mentions Celtic metal. This is a major problem with people splitting off metal from rock articles. For example industrial rock and industrial metal. Normally there is little no reason to split the articles. At this point there are 3 articles on industrial music all trying push there own POV. 13:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridernyc (talk • contribs)

Improving this article

After my recent stint rewriting the gothic metal article, I decided to return to my early effort at this folk metal article and improve it further. I'll be working on this over the next several days over at my personal sandbox. Any comments or suggestions would be welcome. --Bardin (talk) 14:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

A minor point, admittedly, but the "Instruments" section claims that there are fifteen guest musicians on Åsmund Frægdegjevar. I know the referenced review claims the same, so I did not dare change it, but on the list in the booklet, I only count thirteen guest musicians. What the ...? I have a scan of it if you need one. Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

You're right. The official website only list thirteen guest musicians too. No idea whether that reviewer got the two additional guest musicians from. I've changed the sentence now and used the official site as the reference instead. --Bardin (talk) 03:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)