Talk:Genghis Tron

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Wr0ngt33th in topic End of hiatus/New album

End of hiatus/New album edit

Not sure why this article is semi-protected, but the band has announced on their social media that their hiatus is ended (as of August 10, 2020) and that their new album will be coming on Relapse Records in 2021. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wr0ngt33th (talkcontribs) 15:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)Reply


Notability edit

I've tagged this article for notability, because it seems to me that this band doesn't meet the notability requirements of Wikipedia. Djdickmutt 17:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

They fit notability per WP:MUSIC: Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country,3 reported in reliable sources.4
Their tour (for Dead Mountain Mouth) dates were listed at Absolutepunk.net, also, seen here: http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=140981. They're doing another US tour this year, too: http://shop.relapse.com/content/news_all.aspx?NewsItemID=440
They have also signed with Relapse Records, a notable independent record label, though maybe that is up for dispute: http://shop.relapse.com/content/news_all.aspx?NewsItemID=438
All facts presented, I think they're notable enough to be on Wikipedia. -- tal 17:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
More than anything, Genghis Tron is an influential band with a distinct style. I think all of these reasons are sufficient to remove the tag. Thoughts? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.185.130.48 (talk) 19:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC).Reply

Genre? edit

The person who wrote this article tagged the band with terms such as "metal" and "extreme metal". I'm not extremely educated in the genre, but I'm pretty sure the band is essentially grindcore. I replaced all the words "metal" with "grindcore". Radar123 19:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

You would be right, grindcore should definitely be first on the list. 76.121.91.3 (talk) 02:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Picture edit

For some reason I can't seem to post a picture of the band. So far I've uploaded two images (Genghisband.jpg and GENGHISTRON.jpg) but neither seem to work. I encourage someone to find a way to post one of the mentioned files or put up a picture of their own. Radar123 16:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)Reply


Name edit

I don't know much about THIS Genghis Tron, and since this is all "unsourced" material, I think I'll just post it on this talk page. Anyway, when I was a senior in high school in Howard County (Maryland) in 2000/2001, friends and I created ajazz/funk/rock/weird band named genghis tron. So, we did the high school band thing, it was fun, we had a good laugh and recorded some stuff in my basement, but the thing didnt really go anywhere since we all left for college the next year. We invited a friend named Jared Feldman to come push sampler buttons at shows and trot around on stage being a goofy guy. He thought Genghis Tron would be a great name... anyway, fast forward a few years, Jared enrolls at Vassar college in Poughkeepsie. He met the guys who would make THIS Genghis Tron, and thought it would be funny to re-give the name to them. Seems like a kinda asshole move on his part, but I can't really blame him for that. We are still buddies. Point being,

"Their name it's self is an indication of their musical direction, taking it from the Mongol emperor and conqueror Genghis Khan, to express themes of destruction, violence and majesty, and from the 1982 science fiction film Tron to indicate their love for experimentation, science, electronics and technology."

is total bullshit. Its our name! :-)

To view some history of the ORIGINAL Genghis Tron, click here: http://www.geocities.com/genghistron/


Also, check out this blog comment on some dude's blog by me from Sept 19, 2003 http://www.thickets.net/toren/2003/09/19/

Its all fun and games to the original members now, but I'd like to have this comment on this page just to give some insight.

--Daveblack (talk) 14:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Update edit

I plan on updating this page after I am finished dealing with Fuck the Facts. I can't imagine this band not meeting the requirements for notablity. They have two full length albums on fairly big labels (Crucial Blast and Relapse Records).

Though, I notice that the person who questioned notability above, did it more than a year ago, so I think by NOW there should be no question.

Anyways, I plan on giving a slightly more detailed and sourced history (after some research) and a musical style section. If anyone has any suggestions let me know.Ibanez Guy (talk) 15:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Anticon edit

If you google Anticon, you will know that their official website and the facebook page say "Anticon". However, the logo with ant and the myspace page say "anticon.". Their soundcloud page says "anticon" and the twitter page says "anticon records". So we don't have to fix it because we can't decide which is "proper label name".

Speaking of Anticon category and the label navbox, Genghis Tron signed to the label. even though it is just one EP deal. I don't think "they were never signed to the label". If you think so, please write about it with a source before reveting. I don't wannna do "edit war" thing anymore. Thank you. 118.8.43.190 (talk) 21:12, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Actually, it is up to you to provide a source stating that the band was signed to Anticon. Releasing an EP through a label and being signed are two different things. As for the formatting of the name, I just went by the WP article saying it was stylized "anticon.", but it's not a big deal, so "Anticon" is fine. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 22:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
This article says "Genghis Tron get signed to anticon".
Also, I still don't think a musician can release material on a label without any contract, deal, or signing with the label. Please read this article about indie label contract and this article about record label deal. Now, I want you to provide a source that "releasing an EP through a label and being signed are two different things".
I appreciate your understanding for the label name, though. 123.224.250.85 (talk) 14:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
Can you show that http://inyourspeakers.com has "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy"? According to WP:RS, "Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." I question that this site has that reputation.
Regarding your request for a source supporting my statement, from the legal text printed on the Board Up the House remix EP released by Anticon: "All songs © 2008 Genghis Tron ASCAP. Original songs appeared on Board Up The House. Anticon Records. Under exclusive license from Relapse Records." (emphasis mine) This EP was released by Anticon via licensing, which doesn't mean that Genghis Tron signed to Anticon, but rather that Anticon simply has the rights to release that EP. Genghis Tron was still signed to Relapse at that time (and according to Relapse's website, are still signed to Relapse). This article (taken from the established reliable about.com) explains what licensing is (mostly in the context of licensing your album for distribution in another territory, but the same principles apply to licensing within the same territory). MrMoustacheMM (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
I don't know how to show that a source has "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". Can you teach me? I mean, how do we prove it about rocksound.tv or myspace.com, for example? 114.163.242.117 (talk) 19:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
Well, Reuters is cited by other news sources when they use information given by Reuters. "Reuters reported that something happened somewhere today." For an example closer to home, some metal news sites will cite Blabbermouth.net when reporting news. "According to Blabbermouth, some bass player from some band quit yesterday over some reason." In other words, official publications will utilize the source and give them credit. Has In Your Speakers been quoted or reported on by other reliable sources?
Also, I did a reasonably extensive search, and other than your one questionable source, nowhere could I find evidence that Genghis Tron were ever signed to Anticon. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 21:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
Now I'm getting what you mean. Well, how about this one? 114.163.242.117 (talk) 22:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
See also tometotheweathermachine, alloveralbany, shufflerfm, and americannoise. 114.163.242.117 (talk) 23:20, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
Tome and Shuffler are both blogs, thus neither is reliable per WP:RS. Sour Brains doesn't reference the site as a source of information, just that someone this person knows writes at In Your Speakers. American Noise just mentions that someone working for them used to work for In Your Speakers. So no, none of those establish its reliability.
The All Over Albany link is interesting, but ultimately it doesn't really establish that In Your Speakers is a trustworthy source or anything; it's more a piece about what the site does than anything else. So again, no establishment of reliability. What you need is several examples of reliable sources using information given by In Your Speakers, not just articles about the site or that offhandedly mention them.
And again, if Genghis Tron had been signed by Anticon, there would be more than one minor mention of it in some opinion piece somewhere. For example, Blabbermouth would likely have mentioned it. Genghis Tron were never signed to Anticon, and thus the navbox does not belong on this page. The category seems a little more reasonable, since GT did release an EP through them.
Lastly, stop re-adding the navbox until you gain consensus here. Your continued addition of it is edit warring, which is considered disruptive and could ultimately get you banned from the site. You have provided no solid evidence that the navbox belongs here. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 23:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
I think I should admit that In Your Speakers is un"reliable source" for wikipedia now.
BTW, I added Genghis Tron at 'Licence' on "Roster" section of the Anticon article. So I also added the band on the label navbox. Even if the band didn't sign to the label, we can add the navbox on the article. 114.163.242.117 (talk) 00:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Per the comments of User:MrMoustacheMM, "Board Up the House Remixes Vol. 4" is licenced to Antigon by Relapse Records, in the same way that three other EPs in this series are licenced to other companies (Lovepump United, Temporary Residence Limited & Crucial Blast) [1]. And the songs on this EP originally appeared on the album "Board Up the House", the copyright statement of which reads "Published by Genghis Tron(ASCAP)/Relapse Release Publishing(ASCAP)" [2]. memphisto 18:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

IP, please stop edit warring and start listening to consensus. There are two, now three, editors, who think you are wrong and a distribution license is not a reason for inclusion in the nabvox. I'm pretty sure it is OK to list the band in Anticon under "licensed" or something like that, but only bands on the roster belong in the navbox. This is the fourth or fifth time you edit war against consensus, stop it. --Muhandes (talk) 06:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
Muhandes, I already admitted that Genghis Tron, Peeping Tom and Zach Hill were licensed to Anticon and I added them on "License" in "Roster" section. See Anticon#Roster. And you recently wrote "navbox reflects the article, no more, no less". So I added them on the navbox and added the navbox on the artists' articles. Why did you remove only Genghis Tron? I don't get it. How about Peeping Tom and Zach Hill? Also, there is no reason to exclude just three artists licensed to Anticon from the label navbox.
I understand you still think I'm wrong and what I'm doing is "against consensus", but I think YOU are wrong. So you should report it on a noticeboard before reverting. 221.184.68.208 (talk) 14:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
Anonymous IP, please read WP:CONSENSUS. Right now you most certainly are going "against consensus". Several editors here and at other discussions have disagreed with your edits. Instead of continually edit warring, bring your reasons for including the navbox here, and continue to discuss them. If you provide good enough reasons to change our minds, the navbox can always be re-added.
Also read WP:BRD. You made a bold edit – you added a navbox and category to the page. Nothing wrong with that, that's how Wikipedia works. However, once you were reverted and discussion was started, the edit should stay undone until consensus is reached.
Lastly, you still don't seem to understand what "licensing" is. The artists are not licensed to the label at all. Only a specific work (in GT's case, a remix EP) was licensed to the label. Genghis Tron has never been signed to Anticon, and they have never been licensed to Anticon. I suggest you take the time to read the article I linked above explaining what licensing is.
And in the mean time, stop edit warring. It's not helping your case at all. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 16:25, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
Anonymous IP, this is not about what I said or even what I think. Even if I may have thought initially that there is a point in adding Genghis Tron to the navbox, MrMoustacheMM and memphisto here both think it does not belong there, and they have brought convincing arguments, so I agreed with them. Meanwhile, you are clearly going against, and ignoring WP:BRD, and as established here are doing this as a method. You are hiding behind a rotating IP so administrators find it hard to react, but continue this and they will. (As for Peeping Tom and Zach Hill, there was no extensive discussion about them so the status is not as clear. It might be the case that they should be removed as well.) --Muhandes (talk) 16:54, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
I'd like to add my voice and endorse MrMoustacheMM/memphisto's position here. I'd encourage the anon to read the article on licensing and what it means; just because a single record was released under license on anticon does not mean the band deserves a spot in the navbox. Kaini (talk) 17:01, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Edit request on 6 June 2012 edit

Please add {{pp-dispute|small=yes}} to the page.

Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 20:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Not necessary, I meant to only semi-protect, I fixed it. J04n(talk page) 21:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply