Talk:Battles (band)

Band Style?

I'm wondering why does the article have absolutely nothing about the kind of music - in the case of Battles, the distorted vocals were something quite important in their identity -, instead we get reception of their albums. Dskzero (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Math rock?

While the guitar and bass parts sound "mathy," in all the tracks I have heard the drumming is straight-ahead 2 or 3. No mixed meters or changing meters. Is this really math rock? Badagnani 23:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

REPLY:

Math rock is a pretty subjective term. While the

drumming usually keeps an unchanging time signature,

it is an unusual one about every third song. On top

of that, the layers added by the looping guitars and

synths are almost always polyrhythmic when aligned

with the drum beat, which lends to what you described

as the "mathy" sound of the guitars. However, most "math

rock" aficionados would say that BATTLES does not do this to

enough of an extreme to be considered true math rock.

Thanks for the helpful reply. Badagnani 16:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Which songs do you believe have unusual meters? Badagnani (talk) 02:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Genre

Would baroque pop be a suitable genre for this band? 81.132.34.166 (talk) 14:33, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

No, not in the slightest. Unless you're taking the piss, why would you even consider it? Ezenden (talk) 16:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not taking the piss.. perhaps I worded the genre wrong. There is definitely another genre missing from the description but I just can't put my finger on it. no need to be rude either 81.132.34.166 (talk) 19:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Theres certainly no need for negativity - all that's called for is to point out that "baroque pop" refers to stuff like Sufjan Stevens and the Arcade Fire, not stuff like Battles.

Also, incidentally, I wish people would stop adding "post-rock" to the genre bit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.114.91 (talk) 10:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Eh Math rock?? Duh! Techo (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:10, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Biography

I don't agree that the info under biography is really concerning the biographical facts of the band itself. It seems to merely be an account of their video and recorded material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.123.7.81 (talk) 21:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Supergroup?

C'mon, gimme a break. Outside of Helmet, nobody in this band ever sold more than few thousand albums. We cheapen this (stupid) term when we apply it to any band comprised of members of some other bands. This guy loves Battles as much as the next person, but this is no "supergroup." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.20.190.231 (talk) 08:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

^ I'm gonna have to go ahead and agree with this unsigned dude above. The term 'supergroup' is normally reserved for when esteemed musicians from different bands join to form a new supergroup. Like when Tom Petty and Dylan and co came together for The Traveling Wilburys, or when Chris Cornell joined the guys from RATM to form Audioslave. The term supergroup does not denote mega-fame. I'll just go ahead and adjust rather than whinge about it. 59.101.134.238 (talk) 02:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

^ I will have to disagree, this is defo a supergroup. All the current members come from accomplished bands, especially Ian Williams, who with doncab acheived cult status. Lynx is probably the smallest known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.123.235 (talk) 10:24, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Jafeluv (talk) 09:46, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

---

Battles (band) → Battles – Editors have wanted to do this, but haven't yet figured out the way to do it. On 25 January 2012, an IP tagged Battles (band) with {{Move to}}, "requesting a move to Battles". On 29 April 2012, an IP "Redirected page to Battles" by cut & paste. The cut was reverted one minute later, but the paste remained as a WP:CFORK until I just reverted it. The {{Move to}} remains in place. I think these guys have a point. Battles redirects to Battle, where you have to click on the hatnote to Battle (disambiguation) and scan through several battle (singular) items to find the link to the band. If their band isn't made primary, then at least make Battles (disambiguation) primary. Battle is a common English word which shouldn't be WP:OVERLINKed. We don't need to make it easy for editors who link [[battles]] when they should link [[battle]]s. Wbm1058 (talk) 05:57, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. This band is no where near the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for a common word. The is no problem with linking to battles. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
• Strong oppose the primary topic is battle for which "battles" is the plural form. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 08:34, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
• Strongly oppose – the band does not represent world interests. In fact, looking at their peak chart positions, they barely represent American musical interests. That aside, the "(band)" is required to disambiguate it from the clearly greater topic of military battles. Nor should a disambiguation page be required given the internationally recognised meaning of "battles". (Speaking of overlinking - 12" is linked 5 times in the band's Discography section alone...) Ma®©usBritish^{chat} 09:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose for similar reasons to MarcusBritish. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - the band clearly derive their name from the conflict rather than vice versa. We can assume most users of the encyclopedia will be searching for the common meaning and this change would cause them unnecessary inconvenience. Monstrelet (talk) 08:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - per SmokeyJoe and MarcusBritish. not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and it also fails the naturalness and recognisability tests. Peacemaker67 (talk) 13:16, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

• Comment - Gosh, I see it is snowing outside, and summer's not even over yet. Since I submitted this proposal, I fixed no less than 55 pages which had one or more [[Battles]] links that should have linked to the band. And, surprisingly, only 14 other [[Battles]] links that I either unlinked, linked to [[Battle]]s, or something else (rap battles). There are actually 186 pages linking to the band, and while over 800 pages link to Battle (war), 30-day page views is a much tighter "battle"—the band with 8559 views, is running just behind the war (9166 views). Some articles you wouldn't expect link to the band: Major League Baseball 2K8, Wall Street, Off the Air (TV series) and List of Later... with Jools Holland episodes, for example. As to the idea that they don't "represent world interests," Bad Bonn Kilbi, Roskilde Festival 2011, and Glastonbury Festival 2008 among others all link to the band. Maybe they just need more time, their career still seems to be on the upswing. Of course, if they had followed the example set earlier by the Beetles, and named themselves Baddles, we wouldn't have this problem. Their page views and number of links suggest perhaps an insertion of "Battles" redirects here. For the band, see Battles (band). in the hatnote. – Wbm1058 (talk) 17:33, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121102124715/http://www.ultratop.be/nl/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Battles to http://www.ultratop.be/nl/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Battles

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:12, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Why did Tyondai Braxton leave the group?

The article should address this issue, with sources. It's not addressed in the article on Braxton, either. --Viennese Waltz 09:45, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

@Viennese Waltz: What issue? It notes in the article that he did not want to tour? Karst (talk) 10:20, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry I missed that. But I was wondering if there were personality clashes involved as well. --Viennese Waltz 10:39, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battles (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110525172109/http://www.buzzgrinder.com/2011/battles-tour-dates-gloss-drop/ to http://www.buzzgrinder.com/2011/battles-tour-dates-gloss-drop/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120408142350/http://bttls.com/dross-glop/ to http://bttls.com/dross-glop/

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:16, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6ATzQ6MvM?url=http://www.officialcharts.com/artist/_/battles/ to http://www.theofficialcharts.com/artist/_/battles/

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)