Talk:Dark Horse (Nickelback album)

Track 5: Next Go Round or Next Go Around?

Does anyone know for sure which it is? JaredInsanity (talk) 05:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

It's Next Go Round. Says so on the official Nickelback website, that can't be wrong =) Cybersteel8 (talk) 23:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Album reviews

There should be no more then ten reviews in the infobox per WP:Albums. A user has ignored this statement and added a review. Could someone watch this? Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe they would stop adding more, if the review section was less biased. This album was critically panned, yet most of the reviews chosen are mid to high rating. You shouldn't cherry pick reviews to try to make it look like critics liked this album. 121.222.26.160 (talk) 09:31, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Although it did get bad reviews. In general it did get some weirdly positive notable ones. Such as from Rolling Stone. You can't ignore those, so you have to post some high ones. Which should be represented? We should base it on the reviews from http://www.metacritic.com/music/artists/nickelback/darkhorse. Cheers Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:56, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, looking at my count, 5 of the reviews are negative. 2 are average, and 3 are fairly good. I'd say that's pretty balanced actually. If you want to make a larger general statement, start a more expanded "Reception" section taking into consideration reviews that aren't in the infobox. Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Wal-mart exclusive download

I'm confused. The last track on regular album is This Afternoon. I thought the download mp3 was Saturday Night's Alright For Fighting, being the 12th track. Anyone know for sure?  _♫ Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪^Talk 17:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Saturday Night's Alright For Fighting was released as a bonus track for The Long Road. That track has nothing to do with Dark Horse. I hope I understood you correctly.... Cybersteel8 (talk) 23:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Introduction to "Reception" section

There seems to be an edit war over the introduction of the reception section, with an anonymous user insisting on only stating the album received negative reviews, and Fio234, who insist on twisting the lead to make it seem as the album was very well received.

It is true that the majority of reviews for this album were mixed to negative, as can be seen on the reviews in the infobox, and on the review aggregate website, Metacritic. However it is also true that some outlets did have a positive review of the album, and it did win a Juno award.

I have written a non biased intro that clearly states both of these aspects:-

"The album has received negative to mixed/average reviews from professional critics, however it has also garnered some positive reviews and won the JUNO Award for "Album of the Year"."

I believe this short introduction accurately reflect the overall impression of the album without going into to much detail. If the anon and Fio234 disagree, then discuss it here instead of edit warring. You will be reported if you continue to disrupt Wikipedia. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 03:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey I'm perfectly okay with this introduction. Just make sure that other dude stops POV editing it to make it seem like the album was well received - which it wasn't. 121.222.114.150 (talk) 03:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Are you serious??

Heavy Metal? Heavy Metal????? this album????????? you have to be kidding me.... The only source for this can possibly be allmusic... I mean come on.

http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/entertainment/story.html?id=7ff3766f-750c-461a-ac5e-da004c9168ed&p=1 http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/nov/14/nickelback-dark-horse-review

Here is two sources for hard rock, surly that can replace Heavy Metal, post-grunge and alt metal I don't have a prblm with but come on, a little sence please, this is not Heavy Metal Ducky610 (talk) 03:41, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, since there is so much vandalism and edit wars on this article about the genre I'd say we just simply leave it as "Rock". It's accurate and no one would dispute it. It's not the most specific genre cite, but it's one that would avoid any vandalism. Anyone care to comment? Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:30, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thats fair enough I'd say. All sourcable genres for this album are a derivatives of rock. Ducky610 (talk) 08:33, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Since there is so much ambiguity and reverting, I also believe simply Rock would be the way to go. kiac. (talk-contrib) 09:08, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright! I think we have enoughs support then. I'll change it to rock music. Cheers! Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:40, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. But keep the article on your watchlist, as the genre warriors will be back soon enough. 124.186.132.234 (talk) 04:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe alternative metal should be a suggestion. 112.203.160.249 (talk) 09:24, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Unless cites can be added we are going to leave it simply as rock since no one here could agree. Cheers. Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

If i had to put genres for this Nickelback album; they would be post-grunge, alternative rock, hard rock and (if you realy wanted to) alternative metal. Their

first album, Curb, is heavy metal and grunge (or post-grunge), this isn't. For the sake of the music, This Afternoon is a country rock

song and Gotta Be Somebody is pop rock / alternative song; deffinately not as heavy as Curb or the State. Somebody figure this out quickly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.54.248.168 (talk) 02:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Reverted. You need sources, and this has been argued continuously. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I thought I would solve this problem and replace "rock" with "post-grunge", "hard rock" and "heavy metal", but added a source for each of those genres. Besides, rock is way too broad and those three genres describe this album a lot better. Kokoro20 (talk) 11:21, 8 October 2011 (UTC)