Talk:Tooth & Nail Records

Consistency

When putting this as a band's label under their band pages, should they all say Tooth and Nail, or Tooth and Nail Records? Same goes for Solid State. I'm trying to keep them all consistent, and realized they're all different and I should get a consensus before changing all of them.

Opinions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lorenwade (talk • contribs) 05:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

IvoryLine

ok Ivoryline has already had an album come out, and we still don't have a page for them i'm going to put some information up about them so someone can work on their page. this is about their genre and stuff. This has more information about the band I will update more later.User:Rockismorethanmusic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.16.1 (talk) 22:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Um I will try to start it if i get a around to it but can you try to find more information about the band besides it's Genre. User:Skateremorocker —Preceding comment was added at 17:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

We know you're the same person.Inhumer (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

ok i have put up a page for Ivoryline, it's a little bit of a mess but with some help it will be better.User:Skateremorocker —Preceding comment was added at 16:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

References

Is Tooth and Nail still a christian record label?

On Mae's page there is an interview were mae saids that tooth & nail is just a alternative mainstream recored label now.User:Rockismorethanmusic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.22.138 (talk) 13:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

History

The first release on Tooth & Nail was a reissue of "Nailed" by The Crucified.

That's not true. It was "Pet the Fish" by Wish for Eden. "Nailed" was one of the early releases, but not the first.--Velvet elvis81 18:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Far-Less

Why doesn't Far-Less have a wikipedia anymore? ANd how come no one has heard form them since Nov. 11th? Don't tell me they're splitting up too!

Mae

Is Mae signed to Tooth & Nail or not? On Tooth & Nail's website, Mae is listed as one of their artists, so I would assume they are... 67.65.45.119 01:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

No. They jumped ship and joined up with Capitol Records.

But are we sure that they're completely seperated from Tooth & Nail? Like I said, they're still listed on the site (and that site is updated quickly), and bands often have this dual-record label deal where the mainstream label distributes to the mainstream and the Christian label distributes to Christian audiences. (Sorry if this was taking into consideration, just wanted to make sure.) 67.65.45.119 03:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Mae is signed to Capitol, but they are still going to be distributed to the Christian market by Tooth & Nail. AugustWinterman 10:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Solid State Bands

Please stop putting Solid State bands on the Tooth & Nail roster. Unless is specifically states that bands are featured on both rosters(like Underoath), then don't assume that just because they are on Solid State, that they are on Tooth & Nail. AugustWinterman 18:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Later History?

We should list what's going on with former artists, like they do at the Solid State page. e.g., "disbanded, members in Band X" "still active on Label X" etc.--Velvet elvis81 22:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I did this with the information I knew or could find but now it looks messy and not like the nice, neat list it was before. Comments?--Velvet elvis81 19:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Anberlin

I know Anberlin signed with Universal Republic, but I haven't seen in any press releases something stating one way or the other if they're still going to be on Tooth & Nail's roster at the same time. Anybody heard something on that? Roofi's Publicist 00:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, it is a joint record deal. Sort of like The Almost with Tooth & Nail/Virgin 29 December 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.28.74.20 (talk) 03:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Genre

This space is an attempt to get people to debate the stupid war that's going on over genres. Insert comments below. If you don't I'm going to request locking this article and/or sanctions against the parties involved.--Velvet elvis81 (talk) 20:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The user is known to only edit genre based on his opinion whether logged in or not, and has been told multiple times by both Hoponpop69 and myself that Christian rock and Alternative CCM are two different things. Inhumer (talk) 02:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

well then do you want me to take out christian music what so ever. i mean the reson why i left Alternative ccm is to show that some bands are christian on tooth and nail. and whats the bid diff between altccm and christrock? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockismorethanmusic (talk • contribs) 22:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Just so everyone is clear: when this talk page discussion started, the genres were christian rock, indie rock, alternative rock, christian punk, and alternative ccm. We're leaving it exactly like that until SOMEBODY comes back here and makes an argument for adding or removing something. Until that happens, any changes to the genre will be swiftly reverted and if it becomes a problem I will request locking the page to anonymous editors.--Velvet elvis81 (talk) 15:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

here is proof that tooth and nail isn't a christian label anymore http://www.absolutepunk.net/archive/index.php?t-28085.html User:Rockismorethanmusic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.16.1 (talk) 23:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

An online chat archived in an absolutepunk.net message board does not qualify as a reliable source. Furthermore, that page does not offer any "proof" that tooth & nail isn't a christian label anymore. Rather, "Dave" merely presents the hearsay statement that "what I heard is that they're not a Christian label anymore" followed by evidence that the label sells units both in the mainstream AND christian markets. Finally, even if we assume that they're not a "christian label" (whatever that means), the genre list is meant to cover what types of music they generally release. It's possible to both not be a christian label and release music that is christian rock, christian punk, and alternative ccm. I've requested protection of this article until we can get this worked out instead of just edit-warring. You cannot just post some link and then assume the discussion is over. You must wait until consensus is reached before making changes. That's what the talk page is for.--Velvet elvis81 (talk) 22:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, T&N--as it clearly mentions in the article--is part of the EMI Christian Music Group. Note the operative word "CHRISTIAN." It's hard to deny something that's clearly part of the label's business model. Regardless, like I said above, whether or not it's a so-called "Christian label" has little to nothing to do with what type of music it releases and what the genre should be.--Velvet elvis81 (talk) 22:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Alright so we are going to look for fact about alrightUser:Rockismorethanmusic  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.16.2 (talk) 22:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC) 

Tooth and Nail is the distributer and main supplier of the music on the X series of Christian Music —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.137.175.59 (talk) 20:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Isn't T&N an indie label? I realize that they've grown over the years, but I noticed that it's not in the covered genres in the infobox even though the preceding discussion from earlier this year states that indie should be listed. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Further Seems Forever

This has been mentioned a number of times, but I wanted to put it on the talk page because people keep coming by and changing it: by the time FSF broke up Chris Carraba had been out of the band for something like five years. Therefore, we're not going to list Dashboard Confessional in the what members are doing now parenthetical after that band.--Velvet elvis81 (talk) 07:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Possible Bands?

For the past few months a number of bands have been appearing, disappearing and reappearing again on the current artists list: The Good Day Band, Great Whisper, Look at Violence, Poema, Queens Club, and Write This Down. Is this vandelism or fact? I know T&N is painfully slow to update thier website (Anberlin left more than 2 years ago but are still in the current artist section of the site), so is it possible these bands have negotiated contracts with the label and it just hasn't made a press release yet? Also, someone has posted that a band called Behold, the Conqueror! was signed to T&N, but they are not featured on the current or former artist list of T&N's website. Can anyone confirm or deny?

--Spencerz (talk) 04:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

MewithoutYou

Why are they listed as on hiatus. Are you talking about them being on the lable or as a band. Because I just saw them live on Saturday in Atlantic City and they where together as the openign act for Weezer. So they are still preforming--68.81.176.14 (talk) 12:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Can the DOve Awards Tooth and Nail has recieved be put into the awards section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.102.170.29 (talk) 23:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Why was Underoath's grammy nomination removed from the Awards section?

Someone removed Underoath's most recent Grammy nomination for the awards section on the page. Any reason why?

Also would it be possible to add some of their Dove Awards and nominations to the awards section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.43.96 (talk) 14:25, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Many New Bands

Over the past couple of weeks (around the time I added Swimming With Dolphins to the artist list), users have added Come September, From Indian Lakes, I Am Empire, Hyland, and Icon for Hire to the list. I only have citations for Icon for Hire ([1]) and Hyland ( [2]). Does anybody know about the others? I'm going to assume none of them are actually signed to T&N until I see a source. Free (talk) 13:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Redlink revesion on Tooth & Nail Records

I redlinked those two bands in the artist list because they are either notable now or will probably become notable in the near future, and I wanted to encourage other editors to create the articles for them rather than doing it all myself. This is perfectly acceptable under Wikipedia policy (see WP:REDLINK). --Invisiboy42293 (talk) 23:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Let's clarify a few things.

1. Wikipedia:Red link is a guideline not a policy.
2. When to create red links reads, "please do create red links to articles you intend to create" and "Keep in mind that there are various notability guidelines (see WP:NOTABILITY), which exist for a number of subject types, including people (WP:BIO), web content (WP:WEB), organizations and companies (WP:CORP) and more." In short, since you can't currently create an article for the subject inserting a redlink is also not acceptable.

So WP:WTAF. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm aware of all that, but...

1. So what? That only means that it's not required, not that it's forbidden or not a good idea.
2. The sentence goes on, "please do create red links to articles you intend to create, technical terms that deserve treatment beyond a mere dictionary definition and topics which should obviously have articles. Moreover, it later says that "In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article, but for which there is no existing candidate article, or article section, under any name." (italics mine, bold in original). In these particular cases, Nine Lashes' notability might be questionable (they seem to be getting more popular, but you never know), but Sainthood Reps has connections to Brand New and has announced plans to release a second album on T&N, which would qualify them for WP:BAND. So at least in that case, a redlink would be appropriate.--Invisiboy42293 (talk) 04:08, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Did you read that correctly? Nope. Let me add emphasis where it belongs: "please do create red links to articles you intend to create" which backs WP:WTAF. That's not, "maybe someday they'll be notable", it's a short-term create redlink then create the article process. It's not create redlink and maybe some day, if the subject becomes significantly notable someone may create an article for the band. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Out-of-context

http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/indies/1551725/capitol-christian-music-group-completes-acquisition-of-tooth-nails begins "The Capitol Christian Music Group has completed its acquisition of Christian rock label Tooth & Nail's catalog, as well as the catalogs of the label's imprints, BEC Recordings and Solid State Recordings" but that's already discussed in the Structure section using http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/archive/story/116306/ccmg-purchases-tooth-nail-catalog. That report goes on to state that Ebel will "re launch TOOTH & NAIL as an independent label group". So they were considered a Christian label until March 13, 2013 but may no longer be so. Don't use old material to support the current stated of the label. Is there a source to indicate that they still are a Christian label? Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:50, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Is there a source to indicate they're not a Christian label? I have no idea how you get the impression that that article states as such, especially because it uses the term "Christian rock label Tooth & Nail" in the very first sentence. Do you think "independent label group" means a genre of music? Even if you're confusing that, there's still nothing in the article that says it will no longer be a Christian rock label.Hoponpop69 (talk) 15:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

You've missed the point. The source you have is what they were at the time of the sale a year ago. The term "independent label group" is not a genre either, it's a mode of distribution. I have no source to indicate that they want to distance themselves from the term, but you will see that others will remove the term. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:32, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

So your argument is because this source is a year old it's no longer valid? Yet you admit to have no newer source saying this label is no longer a Christian label, and that's somehow more valid?Hoponpop69 (talk) 01:06, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Not entirely. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tooth & Nail Records. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20130411102441/http://www.billboard.com/artist/303442/henry+gonzalez/chart to http://www.billboard.com/artist/303442/henry+gonzalez/chart

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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} 22:30, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Michael Knott

Hey @Speakfor23! I figured I'd get a jump on the discussion of the material you're adding. The major issue is that the article doesn't support the assertion that Knott was a co-founder. While it was "originally conceived" as a joint venture, Knott "bowed out". There is nothing to suggest he bowed out after founding T&N, and we can't assume that's what it means (WP:V). The fact he released an album doesn't mean he was a co-founder, just that he released an album. I haven't been able to find a source that's clearer, but if you do drop it here and we can discuss! glman (talk) 03:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)