Talk:Circle of Dust

Untitled

I have yet to find any mention in any interview or bio that Dan Levler served as a touring member of Circle of Dust, only that he drummed for the one live show of Argyle Park. Can anyone confirm this? --BrentonRyan (Talk) 00:09, 09 April 2009

Removal of "Christian Rock" as genre for Circle of Dust

Circle of Dust had previously been under a Christian label, however the artist has publicly given insight into being associated with Christian music. Source: 2:00 into https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsmekvoMtIs — Preceding unsigned comment added by IXerro (talk • contribs) 23:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

There are reliable sources that credit them as being a Christian music band. Even if you found many times more reliable sources that way they're not, the ones that say they are would still have to be considered. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:29, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Walter - there are plenty of sources that describe CoD as Christian. However, there are sources that mention that Klayton/CoD walked away from the Christian scene, so I amended the infobox to say "early". The current CoD is done through Klayton's Celldweller project and Fixt label, which I don't think anyone considers as Christian.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:53, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

@3family6 and Walter Görlitz: This HM Magazine interview pretty much confirms he has walked away from his Christian faith and Christianity in general, where The Phantom Tollbooth says "While it is a shame that this is the end of the entity that legitimized Christian industrial music".The Cross Bearer (talk | contribs) 02:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree that he is no longer making music for the Christian market, his early work cannot be ignored because of a later shift. I don't know that his early work was Christian rock as the sources support industrial or alternative Christian genres. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:40, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Alternative is rock, and so is industrial rock (the project wasn't something like Blackhouse, or even sometimes Deitiphobia, where you could say the industrial style isn't at all rock music), so Christian rock is the best over-all label.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:45, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Christian alternative rock might be better. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

In a recent interview, it has been stated that "Circle of Dust was never a Christian metal band." http://iprobablyhateyourband.com/interviews/interview-klayton-celldweller-circle-of-dust-scandroid/ IXerro (talk) 20:23, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

That's Klayton's personal opinion, which is certainly valid and worth mentioning, but CoD was definitely considered a Christian band by reviewers and many of its audience. There are many artists (Lecrae, Switchfoot, Derek Webb, Gungor, to name just a few) who reject the label of "Christian music," but the fact remains that their music has been labeled as such by independent reliable sources. Numerous musicians and bands have expressed their dislike for a certain label, whether it be Christian music, djent, grindcore, or whatever other label they've been slapped with, but they are still categorized under that label because that is what reliable sources have given them. Wikipedia summarizes the analysis of secondary sources, not just the statements by primary sources. In this case, secondary sources, in the past, have analyzed CoD as Christian rock/industrial/metal.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:21, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Metamorphosis Album, Recently Removed?

The Circle of Dust Metamorphosis album page appears removed and redirects back to the main Circle of Dust page. The album should have its own page and should be included in the Klayton template box. Metamorphosis released originally as a compilation of three artists: Brainchild, Living Sacrifice, and Circle of Dust, however Circle of Dust absorbed the Brainchild name in 1994, a year after this album released, and all Living Sacrifice tracks were mixes by or produced by Klayton. http://web.archive.org/web/20000524083622/http://www.dusted.com/Discography/discogcircle.html http://web.archive.org/web/20000618150405/http://dusted.com/Discography/discogmet.html https://www.discogs.com/Brainchild-2-Living-Sacrifice-Circle-Of-Dust-Metamorphosis/release/1369295 — Preceding unsigned comment added by IXerro (talk • contribs) 19:56, 4 May 2016 (UTC) IXerro (talk) 19:57, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Metamorphosis_(Circle_of_Dust_album)&redirect=no IXerro (talk) 20:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

The article was changed to a redirect because there were no independent reliable sources to establish it as a notable topic.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

What would be considered an independent reliable source for an album currently unavailable? The remastered edition is set to release June 24th; it would be great if new fans of Circle of Dust could get familiar with the original album beforehand. IXerro (talk) 22:32, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Old reviews of the album in reliable sources would be good - I can't find anything online, though, so print media would be the way to go.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@3family6: Would credits from the CD itself be considered a reliable source? From the back: "All songs reconstructed and produced by Scott Albert except "Desolate" by Psycho Boy" http://www.amazon.com/Metamorphosis-Remixes-Living-Sacrifice/dp/B00076S8NI IXerro (talk) 19:14, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@IXerro: They are reliable for the track listing and similar information, but not for establishing notability. To be notable, the released needs to be discussed in sources independent from the release, the artist, or the label. Analysis in books, magazines, or reliable websites would qualify. See the guidelines for general notability for more details.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:33, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@3family6: Well that's unfortunate. In that case be prepared to bring the page back in eight weeks. IXerro (talk) 22:06, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm hoping we can. This time around it should get some attention that we can document.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:03, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

It would be good to see another well-sourced article about a notable album. I'll be glad to help when I can. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:14, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

1995 Re-Issue vs 2016 Remasters Under Discography

Currently under the Circle of Dust Discography section it lists both the 1992 Circle of Dust self-titled original release and the 1995 Circle of Dust self-titled re-issue, whereas the 2016 self titled and Brainchild remasters are not listed. Is there any reason for this or should the remastered albums belong in this section as well? IXerro (talk) 20:58, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

IXerro - I think nobody bothered to edit that page. Those re-issues should be mentioned.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:56, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Missing Singles in Discography

Exploration (Redux) and Deviate were both released as singles prior to the release of Circle of Dust (Remastered) and Brainchild (Remastered) respectively. IXerro (talk) 22:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Circle of Dust. 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/20110708131439/http://www.celldwellertribe.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6&Itemid=591 to http://www.celldwellertribe.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6&Itemid=591
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708131443/http://www.celldwellertribe.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7&Itemid=591 to http://www.celldwellertribe.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7&Itemid=591
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hmmagazine.com/issue72/72Albums.htm

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) 02:28, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Circle of Dust. 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/20120204055426/http://www.hmmagazine.com/exclusive/circle_of_dust_on_leaving_rex_records200306/index.php?page=all to http://www.hmmagazine.com/exclusive/circle_of_dust_on_leaving_rex_records200306/index.php?page=all

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) 15:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

POV check nomination

I'm about to add the POV check tag to the top of this page, which feels to me like it was written by the artist(s) himself in a way to make himself look good. Specifically:

• In the Formation section, this sentence jumped out at me: "Unfortunately, R.E.X. lost its distribution deal, slid into bankruptcy, and found itself unable to pay the musicians money they were owed." Notice that it cites a biography article that isn't online anymore.
• In the Hiatus section: "Argyle Park would go on to attain notoriety equal to that of Circle of Dust, losing the distinction of being a mere side project." No citation given.
• In the Disengage section: "Much like Klayton's experiences with R.E.X., his short deal with Flying Tart provided a number of frustrations." Do you see what I mean? As it goes on, it feels more like someone trying to make their side seem like the official side.
• In the Reception section: "Unusual for an underground alternative Christian band of the time, Circle of Dust gained nearly as much exposure and appreciation in mainstream industrial audiences as it did among Christian audiences." Again, there's a citation to a site that is no longer up.

Basementwall (talk) 20:29, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Klayton, or his fans, have been known to edit the article on occasion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:02, 9 August 2019 (UTC)