Talk:Creed (band)/Archive 1

Refute of Criticisms

• Why does everyone think that this band ripped off Pearl Jam? Okay, so Scott Stapp sounds like Eddie Vedder, just like Vedder sounds like Jim Morrison from The Doors. Does that mean that Vedder ripped off Morrison? Of course not, because grunge never stole anything, right? Grunge always "respectfully borrowed," but anyone that came after them "stole" (never mind the fact that Stapp himself constantly cites Morrison as a MAJOR influence). People try to take this vocal similarity and apply it to the whole band. Bluntly put, Pearl Jam doesn't have the muscle in its sound to pull off Creed's songs; they only ever sound like garage rock. They aren't loud in the traditional sense, just angry. Creed is much heavier. Plus, the guitar interplay between Mark Tremonti's lead and Brian Marshall's bass is fairly distinctive; there's not a trace of it in Pearl Jam's sound. How does that mean that they "ripped off" Pearl Jam? If you're looking for lawfully confirmed plagiarism, go read about Led Zeppelin. Otherwise, get over it.

• The pure and simple fact of the matter is that Creed isn't a Christian band. All of the members deny it and it's also stated in as many words on the band's site. Fundamentally speaking, Christian music involves God as the subject not the predicate. Creed has never once made a song that is solely ABOUT God. The songs only ever mention Him as existing and presiding over everything, if you will. How does that make it "Christian rock"? If they were to sing about cowboys and Indians would that make it country and western? Speaking of the latter, many country artists include Christian themes in their music but that doesn't make it "Christian country" or whatever the equivalent might be. Talking about God does not a Christian song/band make. It's all about the message of the song. Creed never preached salvation, just like AC/DC never sang about selling your soul to the devil (even though they mention Hell quite frequently). Bono includes Christian allusions in U2's songs ("you carried the cross" in "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For") but they aren't considered Christian rock.

• Okay, so the band was hated in its heyday and is also reviled to a lesser extent in the modern world. Guess what? Nirvana and Led Zeppelin also received a fair amount of hate when they were active as well but you don't see a bunch of fanatics clamoring for a "criticism section" that takes up half of their articles with hearsay. Scott Stapp got beat up by some guy from 311, you say? Kurt Cobain got punched in the face by a bouncer who apparently didn't like him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5vXdbGtzLI. Is that relevant to the band's music or image? I think not. Stapp was a douchebag, you say? Once again, Kurt Cobain quite literally seemed to hate his fans because he felt that they "didn't understand his music." He wanted Nevermind to be named Sheep in reference to all of his "poser" fans. Stapp criticized Pearl Jam, you say? Actually, it was bassist Brian Marshall, geniuses. He was even fired from the band over the incident. If you're going to spew this crap out at least know what you're talking about. And again, Kurt Cobain constantly bashed other bands like Pearl Jam and Stone Temple Pilots without reprimand. Why is it that Stapp is criticized for these things when Cobain was arguably more despicable with his behavior? Just because he killed himself and is now considered some type of "under-appreciated genius" because no one wants to speak ill of the dead? Because Nirvana was innovative, you say? Really? I'm pretty sure that they borrowed their sound from the Melvins and Mudhoney and perhaps even Soundgarden. Whoops, I guess I need to keep stuff like that to myself. I forgot that we're not allowed to criticize any of the big four grunge bands, and especially not Kurt Cobain.

• I understand if you don't like the band's music; you're entitled to your opinion. But if you really have nothing better to do with your time than bash a band whose heyday was over in 2003 and hasn't had any mainstream relevance in over a decade, you need a life. So you hate the band and think they're derivative? That's fine, but get over it. There's nothing wrong with the band's fans not wanting this article to be a source of libel and instead remain neutral. Plus, the majority of you people can't come up with any reasons for why Creed sucks except "they suck because they suck." DEEP. They really should build a college degree on the wisdom of that statement. How about some objective proof that they "suck," aside from the Google search gag? What, there is none? You mean it isn't a mathematically or scientifically proven FACT that they "suck"? What, you're saying it can't be proven? No kidding. Unlike many other art forms, music is PURELY opinion-based. With a painting or a film, even critics can usually respect the craft that went into at least some facet of the work. With music, it's different; it stimulates a single sense of the human brain and calls forth a reaction. The reaction is purely dependent on the personality and history of the individual in question and nothing more, no matter how skilled the musician(s) or intricate the composition might be. How else would we live in a world where dubstep and classical are all filed under the umbrella that is music? As long as nothing within a song or album is broken (i.e. unintentionally out of tune, distorted, off-time, etc.), then the music technically isn't "bad" no matter how much one might hate it. You either like it or don't and that's that. There is no other objective criteria to measure it by. Anything else will be subjective, no matter how "neutral" you might think it is. And for every critic there's always a fan, so who's opinion is less biased or more important? No one's; not mine and not yours.

• It's fine if you hate everything about this band but you can find better uses for your time. This world is full of negativity and people spend too much of their time spreading it. What good comes from tearing down someone else that finds enjoyment in a certain type of art? If you don't like Creed, fine. No one's making you and frankly, few people care. Why don't you spend your time spreading positive word about music that you DO like instead of wasting your time ranting about what you don't? Does this band deserve a "criticism" section? Absolutely. Never has there been a more divisive artist in the world of popular music and those that might research the band deserve to know the full story. Do they need to read libel about Pearl Jam plagiarism and dissertations about someone's personal feelings towards the material? No.

World Tour

WOO! Creed's coming back in 4-5 months for a World Tour! :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Criticism

It would be nice if we could have a section on how much Creed sucks. Just a thought...

Or a section about how great they are. Your comment has nothing to do with the article.

Many Creed fans disagree with you... Making cracks like that at bands just because you disliked them is in bad taste, IMHO.

You could always write a section on the criticisms aimed at the band's image and the lead singer if you want. Gotta admit that the music was pretty good though! I suppose the singer's slightly unusual voice might put people off, but personally I like it. And you can't say anything againt the instrumentalists, they're all brilliant.

The band itself has brilliant artistic flow. Everything from the vocals to the instruments. Creed has gone above and beyond standard rock with a sound that is both pleasing and a tune that is mellow. Along with that they put something behind their music that hardly any singers/bands do now days, its called "MEANING" or a "STORYLINE". Music used to be full of stories and meaning but in todays music they are wanting to talk about smoking "SPLIFFS", or "Hoes in different area codes", and "Somewheres I belong"... Now Creed takes both instrument and vocals and make pure rhythmic poetry into something that people who are fans to Rock appreciate the music behind Creed.

True, I recognised talent in the band the first time I heard them. There is something my brother said that seemed like a valid criticism - Scott Stapp clearly puts that singing voice on. I've heard tracks of him talking, he talks nothing like he sings. To some people the fact that he 'fakes' his singing voice is really irritating, I think. To be honest, it sounds good no matter if it's real or not... imho...

Well have you ever heard Brittney Spears voice? When she talks sounds like she needs a voice box, but when she sings its pure melody. Not many singers sound the same way as they do when they sing. They control their voice perfectly, like the saying goes, Some just got it, and well he has it. For those who hate Creed, WHY? Mad they made it and you didn't? Are you mad that they made something of themselves? Stop the hate, grow up and Enjoy the music for what it is. If you don't like them don't listen to them it's not like someone is forcing you to listen to them!

I think you misunderstood my (brother's) point - he puts that very strange accent and the really deep voice on when he sings. Nobody can say he's a bad singer, he's one of the few decent ones in today's market, but I suppose some people just want to hear his real singing voice. Or that even may be his real singing voice (judging from his talking voice, I doubt it), in which case, who cares anyway? It's a good, unique voice and to hold that against him is pretty petty.

There should be a section on criticism. A lot of respected people out of the Seattle music scene have come out and criticized Stapp, including Jack Endino to name a few people. Where is the mention of Stapp insulting Eddie Veddar of Pearl Jam, probably the most memorable thing to happen in Creed's career besides the record sales? This article looks like it is leaning heavily towards a non-neutral pro-Creed POV --- 24.30.92.33 14:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

It wasn't Stapp, it was bassist Brian Marshall. If criticism needs to be spit out at least know what the heck you're talking about.

I thought everybody pretty much agreed by now that Creed is horrible. Someone should add a section on how Stapp got his ass kicked by 311 recently in a hotel bar, and how everyone in the world was happy that 311 finally did what they've wanted to for years.

I added a section borrowed from the 311 article, but it was quickly removed by ESkog without any explanation. I added it back, but don't want to get into a revert war. I think that this is a good place to discuss it. Rm999 04:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Remember this is Wikipedia; just the facts gentlemen... Kguirnela 01:13, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

20 bucks and 14 pounds says that 90% of the people here are avid Christians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.137.4.37 (talk) 19:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Whats avid? Must be an American thing. Most people, like me, are not Christian, but why be against it? Just because its cool? Creed have some of the most loyal fans around the world, without beeing all about anti this and that, just to get a 14 year old with an identity crisis like you to buy their record... 83.108.236.203 (talk) 01:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion the "criticisms" section needs to be greatly expanded. I'm sure there are still fans out there but the general consensus is that Creed sucks; they are one of the most reviled bands of that period. This article really glosses over, and fails to even mention, a lot of the negatives about them. Their infamous Chicago show for example is brushed aside and made to sound more like it was a handful of angry fans then any kind of serious incident. Also not even mentioned is the role Scott Stapps ego, destructiveness and general stupidity played in the collapse of the band. Some of that could certainly go in the Scott Stapp article but it should be a part of this one as well. Consider that their guitarist Mark Tremonti is so bitter about the experience that he hasn't even listened to any Creed songs since the breakup and refuses to play any of them ever again, and he's not alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.82.30.222 (talk) 21:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but any article on this band that does at least mention Eddie Vedder and/or Pearl Jam is simply ignoring the huge elephant in the room, since this is a big part of the band's sound. You may argue elsewhere whether it amounts to plagiarism or bad taste or whatever, but they should at least be mentioned as a major influence. Nobody is being bashed here, that has already been done out in the real world. Wikipedia is not a fansite. An article without these points is clearly biased and written by fans for fans. --Beyonce (talk) 10:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, the problem with that is it's hard to find reliable sources that speak of these criticisms. This "Pearl Jam" criticism was mentioned before, but lacked sources, and was constantly vandalised by anti-Creed people.

I think I saw a Pitchfork Media review/article that discussed these concerns, even going so far as stating "Creed sound like Pearl Jam more than Peal Jam", but I can't find it anymore. Anyway, as has been said, no source, no mention :( 123.211.70.91 (talk) 10:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I understand the need for sources, so perhaps that's what should be done. For starters, how about MTV dedicating a whole Celebrity Deathmatch to it.--Beyonce (talk) 12:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I've renamed "Controversies" to "Reception and controversies". I've added some information about the bands poor critical reception and the constant PJ comparisons (all is accurately sourced), and I've also written about the bands huge commercial success. It seems pretty neutral to me, but perhaps you could look over it and check if you agree. 124.179.173.61 (talk) 07:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Search "worst band ever" on Google and Creed appears. Pic: here --Si6x12 (talk) 00:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk page use and POV

There's little going on on this talk page that is about the article itself, but rather arguments about the quality of the band. That's not what the talk page of an article is for. Whether you hate or love this band is irrelevant, what matters is that they're notable and the Wikipedia article on them should be quality.

That said, I have some minor POV concerns about this article, but not enough to flag it with a tag. I think it's hovering on the edge of POV in favour of the band, which I can slightly understand in response to the heavy POV against them, but which needs to be carefully monitored nonetheless. I'd like future editors to keep that in mind when working on the article, and to watch for POV pushers. - dharmabum 10:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Scott Stapp and 311

Shouldn't the section about the fight between Stapp and 311 be moved into the Scott Stapp page? Just a thought.ONEder Boy 00:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I took the text from the 311 article (not the indivdual band members). I think at least a mention should be made about the fight in this article though. Rm999

I have to agree with ONEder Boy in the fact that it was 311 vs Scott Stapp not 311 vs Creed

If both bands fought each other, it should go in the band articles. But if 311 just fought Stapp, it belongs on his page and not the Creed page. 69.204.194.148 (talk) 14:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Religion

• Why has band not been pooled into the Christian_rock music style? They have made many statement in articles and VH1's Behind the Music regarding this fact? Hackajar 06:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• I should have added, just because lead singer disavow's cristian label, doesn't mean their not christian rock. That's like a man saying "I'm not a man, I'm a women, I just happen to have a penius! I'm a woman trapped in a man's body". While true you might feel "trapped" in the cristian rock pigion hole, you placed yourself there with lyric's and statements on behind the music. He (Scott) could have made these statments to regroup the fans lost by his previous statements on that show. [1] Hackajar 06:36, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Scott Stapp is the only member of the band that is a strong christian and they even state in articles that they are not a christian rock band, but mearly a Hard Rock, Post-Grunge, Alternative Rock band. Matthew Husdon
• It might help to fix the beginning... it looks just a little bit like a contradiction. First it says that the band constantly dismisses the label of Christian music, and a quote from the frontman is provided stating that they ARE a Christian band. I don't know enough about the band to make any sort of assessment, so I'm not going to touch it. anonymous

Does it say "ARE" or "are not"? -- Kguirnela 02:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

"We are not a 'Christian band'. We have no agenda to lead others to believe in our specific beliefs."

They may claim to be non-Christian, but their lyrics disagree. The following is from "My Own Prison":

"I hear a thunder in the distance

See a vision of a cross

I feel the pain that was given

On that sad day of loss

A lion roars in the darkness

Only He holds the key

A light to free me from my burden

And grant me life eternally "

To me, that kinda sounds Christian. The cross and life eternally are two big things in Christianity. Also, why would he say it was a "sad day of loss" if they were not religious?" Wikizilla ^{(Signme!)Talk}

Just because some of their lyrics in a few of their songs are of a Christian theme doesn't mean they are a Christian band!

I think they are like Anberlin or Relient K They do some Christian but not all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.33.96 (talk) 04:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Never mind.I said that a while ago and its not true at all.These aren't even true Christians.There drug addicted alcaholics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.75.4 (talk) 00:51, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Tone

The band has said that although some of the members are christian this does not make them a christian band. Surely it is up to the band members whether or not they are a part of a christian band.

Criticisms

There should be a criticisms page for them. Many people don't like them and im sure there can be some complaints found. i believe that emogame critisized them

lol, what? a lot of people hate creed, and that is the only thing that should be mentioned, and briefly, if at all. wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so do can you see how a page devoted to critisicms of a band doesnt make sense?

but just so you know, creed is one of the best bands ever :P maybe i should start a page dedicated to why creeds music is so amazing. see Everything Inane 19:56, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Worst band ever, jesus.

Let us know when He gets back to you for a followup comment. Also, could you perhaps ask Him to post it on the internet or in a new edition of the Bible? We need PRINT sources, not T-shirt memes.

I removed the entire "Critism" section as it was purely heresay about "some people" thinking the vocalist sounded too much like Eddie Vedder. If there's a noteworthy "criticism" beyond "some people" haveing some kind of ambiguous vibe about the band, then perhaps that should be documented with references, but otherwise, this section seemed only to serve to bash the group. -- Nick Becker

Yeah! Wikizilla ^{(Signme!)Talk} 20:43, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

This article practically could've been written by Creed's publicist, makes nothing but the barest mention of the widespread popular disdain for this band.108.131.118.100 (talk) 13:03, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

there should be more criticsms listed. they were listed on the top worst bands ever list by... rolling stone? one of those music magazines for sure

That's funny since Rolling Stone rated their last album "Weathered" (my personal all time favorite album) as 3 1/2 out of 5 stars. Not a bad rating by Rolling Stone for the last album of what they themselves call "one of the worst band evers". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.6.23 (talk) 10:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Edits

Upgraded infobox. Kguirnela 17:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

since when...

are they post-grunge? i thought they were just shit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.247.124.237 (talk) 03:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

Since when was "shit" a musical genre? This is a talk page for discussing the article, not for bashing the band. James25402 20:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Creedlogo.png

Image:Creedlogo.png 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 Wikipedia articles 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 20:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Creed-weathered.jpg

Image:Creed-weathered.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 Wikipedia articles 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 20:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Creed-Human Clay.jpg

Image:Creed-Human Clay.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 Wikipedia articles 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 20:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Creed Greatest Hits.jpg

Image:Creed Greatest Hits.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 Wikipedia articles 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 21:00, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Creedlogo.png

Image:Creedlogo.png 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 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 08:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Worst band in the world

If you type in worst band in the world into Google, it will ask you if you meant Creed, shouldn't this be mentioned somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.225.119 (talk) 18:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Holy Shit!. He's right (kinda). Frvernchanezzz (talk) 09:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Until somebody alters the google bomb to point to another band. Hell, I might get working on this right now. Plain White Tees for the worst band in the world, who's with me? 69.204.194.148 (talk) 14:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

This really says something about the bands "talent" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.137.4.37 (talk) 20:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

It no longer does this, and a Google search isn't a reliable source anyway. Please let other parties do the original research, and then reference them. Please also see User:Dharmabum420's comment above about use of talk pages. --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 10:25, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I added the Google "worst band in the world" fact, nd noticed it was taken down. But I agree that Google doesn't quite fit the Wikipedia standard for a reference. HOWEVER, the band being considered "the worst band in the world" is clearly more than just a temporary thing: this discussion is a year old! So in a "trivia" section, I added that "worst band in the world" is currently listed as "Creed" in the Urban Dictionary. I believe this to be a valid trivia FACT about Creed. Thoughts? 06:29, 10 December 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.136.222.238 (talk)

Just thought I'd point out that it's back: [2] I get that Google's not a reliable source, but this is obviously a long-running phenomonon. Trvsdrlng (talk) 05:07, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Now, it doesn't even ask you if you meant Creed, it just brings up search results for Creed. Ouch. DFS (talk) 10:12, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

It does it... try with the instant results, just typing in "worst band of all time" Creed is the first link! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.149.125.157 (talk) 23:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

If I write "biggest ho in the world" your mom's pic will show up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.116.23.101 (talk) 02:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

In fact, if you don't like the band, don't listen to it, simple enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.116.23.101 (talk) 02:33, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

This Should Absolutly be mentioned in some form. The whole Worst band in the world "Phenomenon" has in FACT happened .. Weather they are IN FACT the worst band in the world is of course a matter of debate. But it SHOULD be mentioned; That if you did IN FACT type in those words YOU DID get results for creed. That says something to the bands reception by the online community, if nothing else. If this is not included I can make the argument that every other mention of their "critical acclaim or failure" be removed as well. it speaks to their reception by the masses of people. again ITs FACT. IT DID HAPPEN.. and for that matter it still brings you to their wiki page as the second page offered to this day.. if it dosnt deserve to be mentioned here then where ? im all for someone including it within the article somewhere.--HighallTimes (talk) 16:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

i just googled "the worst band ever" and creed on wikipedia was still the top result, even if it no longer suggests creed it is still relevant as google is very much part of society and it qualifys as a fun fact imo (108.92.110.184 (talk) 06:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC))

Not any more. Looks like the votes are split now, with Nickelback and Dave Matthews. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• This little event was probably due to association. Google, along with other search engines, has autofill options, etc. to help users. Enough people probably used "worst band" and "Creed" together in a search bar enough times that the engine just started bringing up the band's website, thinking that's what people were looking for. Or maybe Google has some comedians working for them that just added the band's site to the search because they don't like them, either.

Camp?

I was just browsing through wikipedia and stumbled upon the Creed (band)-page. At some point I somehow got the feeling I missed something because of the following sentence: 'Camp left the band in 2001, and Stapp replaced him.'. Who's Camp? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chektones (talk • contribs) 04:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

The oh-so-controversial "Christian" label....

I do not think it is fair or justifiable to label Creed "Christian" on grounds of such.

1. Qualifying your own beliefs is not objective and not N-POV... if you have an explicit (clear-cut) statement from a RELIABLE source saying that they are indeed "Christian" and that they play "Christian music"... it is justifiable to label as such then.

2. The argument that just because one band member is a Christian doesn't qualify the rest of their band to be Christian. For instance, If I follow your logic, I can easily argue that atheists are a bunch of religion-hating people (which is absolutely false in most circumstances) just based on the existence Christopher Hitchens or any atheist fundamentalist or counter claim ... people can argue that Christians are a bunch of homosexual haters just based on a fundamentalist church. A simple fallacy I see in your argument is that "correlation does not lead to causation". Just because one claims to be Christian and another claims to correlate that the band will create songs based on one member's beliefs is fallible, it simply will not always lead to such.

3. I believe until we have reasonable and objective grounds NOT emotional grounds to believe Creed is entirely on board with the Christian label there is no reason to label them such.

4. Finally, it is easy to throw around the "Christian" label nowadays... a band can easily proclaim to be Christian and yet promote hypocritical beliefs. Now we haven't seen that problem in music yet however as a psychology student, I understand that people can be somewhat easily be persuaded by their emotions because as such a thought entails an emotion.

5. Regardless, we are looking for FACTS here not emotions. If you feel so strongly about it, please don't post it on an encyclopedia... there are many ways to express such.

I welcome any challenge as long as they are coherent and not excessively emotional. Remember, we are trying to maintain NPOV here not an EPOV (emotional point of view).

Just my two cents... 137.186.221.73 (talk) 06:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Who is Brian Basher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.89.107 (talk) 16:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

They chose the label. I think that makes it fair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.74.100.27 (talk) 06:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Milestones?

Is the milestones section really necessary? It's not in any other band page I've seen, it just makes the page a lot longer and the info should really simply be contained within the history section. As it is it just feels like a fan page section. If no one objects, I'll remove it. Prophaniti (talk) 11:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Hard rock and Christian rock

Please do not insert these genres because both are false when concerning the band Creed. Creed have stated that they are Christians, but are not a Christian rock band. As for hard rock, no reputable source has ever listed them as such - and for good reason; they aren't hard rock. Simple as that. So please people, stop inserting them, as they will both be removed mercilessly.

Again, genres that Creed are not are hard rock and Christian rock. 124.185.6.19 (talk) 03:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I, actually, would like to point out that they are indeed a hard rock band. Listen to the song "Bullets" and tell me they're not. Even if, for the most part, their songs aren't all hard rock, they are a hard rock band and can be labeled alternative rock as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.81.243.250 (talk) 00:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

They're not a hard rock band in both the "classic' sense of the word, or even the "modern" definition. They are neither alternative in any way at all. They are a post-grunge band - besides, post-grunge is a form of hard rock anyway, so it doesn't matter. 121.222.114.150 (talk) 05:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Competition?

At one point, there was a competition where fans had to analyse the album art to find clues and eventually solve a puzzle for a competition (there was a Guitar World article about it- back at the turn of the century, GW LOVED these guys...)- shouldn't this get a mention in the article? 58.174.227.44 (talk) 02:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Fan Reaction to Break Up

I have re-added the fan reaction section that used to be their Bluedemocrat (talk) 04:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I have removed this section because it is irrelevant fluff, is unsourced, and does not improve the article. 123.211.70.91 (talk) 06:12, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Christianity

Why would the debate over whether they are a Christian band or not be any type of controversy?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.193.193.154 (talk) 16:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC) I mean yea, it's clearly debatable but there's nothing controversial about the whole subject either way, the Christianity debate should have its own section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.193.193.154 (talk) 16:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Band Image

Does anyone have a more recent image of the band, preferably from 2009, that they could upload and release for use here? The current image is sort of bland, is outdated, and doesn't include Brian in it. 124.179.173.61 (talk) 07:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I added a new one from the 2009 tour but Wikipedia's gay copyright shit removed it.

File:55555creed5.jpg has got to (and will) go. It's a publicity shot straight from their website, and it is used just to show what the band members look like. Textbook violation of WP:NFCC. There's nothing at all wrong with having an older (free) image. Alex finds herself awake at night _{(Talk · What keeps her up)} 05:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

A Thousand Faces

can somebody make a page of this song, please?147.70.112.171 (talk) 16:37, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

SemiProtection

It needs to be done, Creed and the Full Circle band page are seriously getting vandalized alot, as well as Scott Stapp's page. Wikipedia can make their lives easier by putting it on those.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao200 (talk • contribs)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.56.139 (talk) 14:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC) 

I'm looking through the edit history and I'm not seeing this, but I'll add this page to my watchlist and try to keep an eye on it. Kansan (talk) 18:01, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

It's not long been reverted: [3] HrZ (talk) 18:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

example : Daughtry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.87.223.178 (talk) 13:02, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Genre

Well, I have noticed that the genre has been changed and reverted quite frequently. After taking a look, there is no source for pop rock, alternative rock/metal or heavy metal on Allmusic (the Style list is unreliable). If they are to be included, reliable sources need to be found for them. There is, though, plenty of sources for hard rock and post-grunge, Allmusic, About.com, EW, etc. seem to mention both genres in their reviews. HrZ (talk) 11:57, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

To make it clear, post-grunge is a sub-genre of alternative rock? Am I right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.172.244 (talk) 01:23, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 14 November 2011

"Due to poor ticket sales one venur started selling tickets"... venur should be venue.

Zafana (talk) 18:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done HrZ (talk) 18:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Protection for all Creed-related articles

Every article about a Creed album or song needs to be protected so that only registered users can edit them. Anonymous editors are constantly changing genres without providing a source or discussion. I keep reverting their edits and telling them to provide a discussion or source, but they just won't listen. I even tried adding notes to every article telling editors not to change the genres without a discussion, but it didn't do any good. These anonymous users aren't going to stop unless the articles are protected. --John of Lancaster (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Taking out the claim that Stapp and Tremonti are prolific

I've taken it out twice now. Please weigh in. Being prolific is not the same as selling a lot of records. Creed might be one of the best selling songwriting duos in rock history, but I don't think that Creed's four albums justify the claim that they are "one of the most prolific" songwriting duos of rock and roll history. Hall and Oates have 18 albums, and I think we could list a dozen more duos that have nearly as many or more. I don't think four albums cuts it.

This claim of being prolific is sourced from an MTV bio, but this does not seem like a good reason to leave in this rather obvious usage error.

Agreed. Prolific, meaning producing works in abundance, is absurd on its face. I don't care if an mtv bio uses it; there are hundreds of "songwriting teams" that are more prolific than Stapp and Tremonti. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.47.205.126 (talk) 17:44, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm convinced. You may remove it from the article. I just looked up the word on multiple sources and it all reports the same. Be sure to sign your posts when discussing issues on the talk page. TJD2 (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I've taken it out. Chachee2000 (talk) 16:06, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, it comes from a really poorly written bio. For example: "Their collaborations delivered numerous chart-topping records that are a testament to the enormity and success of Creed." "Enormity," in it's first denotation, measures the immorality of something. Chachee2000 (talk) 16:11, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

If it's not by a professional source (as in if it's a user created bio) it probably shouldn't have been used in the first place...Odd TJD2 (talk) 20:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

creed awards

according to vh1 creed has recieved 10 total awards and 19 nominations please add them — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.87.219.31 (talk) 09:32, 30 June 2012 (UTC) why the hell have they not yet been added plz add thm.183.87.223.230 (talk) 14:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

http://www.metrolyrics.com/creed-awards-featured.html

Many of these are not notable and their addition would be unnecessary. Live Light (talk) 20:40, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Awards are common place on band articles (including GAs and FAs) and the awards listed appear to be notable, so not entirely unnecessary. The sources, however, are questionable. But in anycase if they have won many awards (with reliable sources to confirm them), a seperate article should be made for them, List of awards and nominations received by Creed, instead of including them here. That's my what I think anyway. HrZ (talk) 16:49, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

i agree such a page should be created — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.63.43.116 (talk) 07:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

its quite surprising thAT nothing has been done so far the awards should be included before i die mahn come on — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.63.49.173 (talk) 11:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I cleaned up the awards section. There's references so they are legit, including videos to them winning certain awards. I took out the album certifications because they are already included under the discography section.Xffactor (talk) 12:29, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Twitter a Wikipedia worthy source?

The #40 reference is an announcement on their Twitter handle - https://twitter.com/Creed/status/203335422808563712 - wouldn't that be a self-published source?--AbeFrohman1977 (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Found my answer at WP:RSOPINION, will look for alternative--AbeFrohman1977 (talk) 16:06, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Creed (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140728014339/http://uk.real.com/music/genre/Christian_Rock/articles/375445/-related-articles-page-5/ to http://uk.real.com/music/genre/Christian_Rock/articles/375445/-related-articles-page-5/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Rolling Stone

I love that article by RS magazine, calling Creed the worst band of the 90's. because you know if RS calls something good, it's probably crap. So, the adverse is also true. This tells me that RS writers don't like post grunge music, and are jealous that their favorite artsy fartsy artist didn't sell 30 million albums during the decade. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UtahCountryBoy (talk • contribs) 20:42, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

"Heavy metal" shouldn't be listed in the infobox.

It seems that someone is either jokingly or ignorantly classifying Creed as a heavy metal band based on a single reference. Since I don't want to genre warrior it, I'd like some consensus on whether it still belongs or not, seeing as Creed has probably never played heavy metal as it's regularly known. The edit seems to be a troll seeing as the labeling of bands as specifically heavy metal often incites disagreement among listeners for more popular acts such as Creed. The same edit has happened with the article for similar band Nickelback, but has since been reverted. The other genres listed are well-documented and easily researched, but the mention of "heavy metal" specifically is nowhere to be found except in three of the reviews for their albums listed on their respective articles, and none of them actually refer to Creed's music as heavy metal (although I can't read German, so someone double-check the Rock Hard review for Weathered). The Christgau review for Human Clay doesn't really say it and we all know that he's a metal-hating curmudgeon, so he's probably being facetious anyway. You can see for yourself if the Rolling Stone review of Weathered proves anything or not. The genre isn't consistent with any of the related articles on Creed's music either. Only one other mentions heavy metal and that should be removed as well. Dusk Malice (talk) 17:32, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

• Thankfully, a bot has stepped in on my side to undo the edit, but upon checking the actual "fix," it didn't do what it was meant to. If the proper fix isn't made soon enough, I'll probably take the liberty of undoing the edit myself. I hope it's not a problem. -- Dusk Malice (talk) 03:22, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Creed isnt heavy metal. It still appears. Batvette (talk) 18:27, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, but thanks for the agreement. I urge you to also try to prove that they are heavy metal though, because that will ultimately refute the assertion that they are commonly considered as such. It seems that the one user who was blocking my edit many months ago was banned, so I'm going to resume finding corroboration for the stance that the genre shouldn't be in the infobox. Discussing it elsewhere is fine, but there simply isn't enough evidence to support the notion that Creed is widely called heavy metal. Dusk Malice (talk) 09:45, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Creed (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/20120115034358/http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/chart-watch-extra-the-top-20-album-sellers-of-the-2000s.html to http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/chart-watch-extra-the-top-20-album-sellers-of-the-2000s.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040814024301/http://www.mtv.com/bands/s/stapp_scott/news_feature_080904/index2.jhtml to http://www.mtv.com/bands/s/stapp_scott/news_feature_080904/index2.jhtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080622162236/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com:80/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=51580 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=51580
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151106075211/http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?resultpage=3&table=tblTop100&action= to http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?resultpage=3&table=tblTop100&action=
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?resultpage=1&table=tblTop100

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 06:31, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Why is this in legacy and reception?

This line: In 2012, lead singer Scott Stapp published his own memoir titled Sinner's Creed, which details his early life and tenure with the band. Does not seem relevant to that section. Batvette (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Creed (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/20110715050840/http://www.passionbreedsfollowers.com/media/print/areviews/gtm.shtml to http://www.passionbreedsfollowers.com/media/print/areviews/gtm.shtml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=51580
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110526075050/http://www.nyrock.com/interviews/creed_int.htm to http://www.nyrock.com/interviews/creed_int.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707203808/http://www.backstageaxxess.com/index.php/concertreviews/344-creed-concert-review-2010 to http://www.backstageaxxess.com/index.php/concertreviews/344-creed-concert-review-2010

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 09:16, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Creed (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/20110528224809/http://blogs.suntimes.com/music/2009/08/creed_they_heard_we_missed_em.html to http://blogs.suntimes.com/music/2009/08/creed_they_heard_we_missed_em.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090627022402/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=122439 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=122439
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100110105612/http://www.guitarworld.com/article/creed_announce_first_live_dvd to http://www.guitarworld.com/article/creed_announce_first_live_dvd
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715102339/http://www.pollstar.com/blogs/news/archive/2010/04/19/718999.aspx to http://www.pollstar.com/blogs/news/archive/2010/04/19/718999.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110228190346/http://www.al.com/music/birminghamnews/index.ssf?%2Fbase%2Fentertainment%2F1255853723220320.xml&coll=2&thispage=2 to http://www.al.com/music/birminghamnews/index.ssf?%2Fbase%2Fentertainment%2F1255853723220320.xml&coll=2&thispage=2
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.comcast.net/slideshow/music-bilbestartists/3/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 22:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Creed (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/20150623013909/http://www.kerrang.com/32287/havent-close-friend-scotts-9-years-mark-tremonti/ to http://www.kerrang.com/32287/havent-close-friend-scotts-9-years-mark-tremonti/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 11:42, 7 December 2017 (UTC)