Talk:Deftones

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleDeftones has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 7, 2016Peer reviewReviewed
June 6, 2018Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Progressive metal shouldn't be listed[edit]

Progressive rock is a genre driven by technical structures, and a mixture of jazz and classical music defined by artists Frank Zappa, King Crimson, ELP, Genesis and Rush.

Mudvayne is a progressive metal band.

Deftones is a nu-metal band. The sources identifying Deftones as prog are fake news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.223.107.152 (talk) 22:34, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Genre discussion[edit]

I know that, apparently, this was just discussed recently, but hear me out. If we are aiming for "generality" in the genre boxes, why don't we just leave "alternative metal" and "experimental rock" in the box rather than putting such an ill-defined and controversial term as "nu metal" in the box with the awkward clarifier that it refers to "early" Deftones? I understand there are a lot of sources for "nu metal." However, even disregarding the fact that the majority of these sources are either from the 90s-early 00s or refer to Deftones as unfairly classified as nu metal, no longer deemed nu metal, etc.; and disregarding that only 2 of of their 7 albums have been consistently associated with "nu metal," the fact remains that "nu metal" is widely regarded as a sub genre of "alternative metal." If this is the case, "alternative metal" not only encompasses their newer work but their earlier work that many deem to be "nu metal." "Alternative metal" is general enough that it includes their works deemed "nu metal" yet does not seem as clunky and does not create controversy.

Furthermore, "nu metal" is already included under the "Styles and Influences" section of the article, which seems like a perfect compromise. Otherwise, by putting "nu metal" in the box, you open the door for the inclusion in the info box of various genres and sub genres with which Deftones have also been associated. Meanwhile, "alternative metal" and "experimental rock" are inclusive and general enough to capture almost any genre or sub genre that has been ascribed to the band, including "nu metal". Madreterra (talk) 19:15, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the last thing this article needs is yet another genre discussion. Evidently, this has been discussed lenghtly beforehand, as seen on the archives and most recently on Talk:Deftones/Archive 10. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 19:31, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, okay. I'm aware. I said that. Should I have edited the archived discussion? My point is, "nu metal" classification is already included and even discussed in detail under the "Styles and Influences" section of the article. I am certainly not trying to completely censor or whitewash the fact that Deftones have been considered "nu metal," I understand that it needs to be mentioned. It just seems a little outdated, overly controversial, and overly specific to put "nu metal (early)" in the info box when there are less restrictive and less contentious alternatives that encompass the majority of their work, rather than two or three early albums. The fact that this discussion reoccurs every few months should be enough of an indication that it is best to leave mention of "nu metal" out of the info box while maintaining the discussion of the "nu metal" label within the article. Meanwhile, "alternative metal" and "experimental rock" are inclusive and general enough to capture almost any genre or sub genre that has been ascribed to the band, including "nu metal." I don't want to appear biased, although, obviously, I have come off as such to a few editors. I certainly won't deny that I have my own opinions as to how the band has been labeled genre-wise. However, any opinions in that regard are not the reason I am bringing this back up. I just wanted to see if there could be a compromise that will limit genre-warring while still addressing the fact that some of the Deftones' discography has been considered "nu metal." To me, the obvious and preferable compromise would be to use "alternative metal" in the infobox to cover "nu metal" while still specifically addressing "nu metal" in the "Styles and Influences" section. Thanks for your time, and sorry that you have to hear this once more, but I think it is a necessary point to bring up. Madreterra (talk) 19:15, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That last discussion should not have been archived so soon, which is why I turned off the bot just now. The page can be manually archived quite easily.
Anyway, the fact that a few people keep complaining about the "nu metal" genre being listed in the infobox does not mean we should allow it to be removed. The band certainly was nu metal; few deny this, and a great many assert this. Around 2000 they changed their genre, turning away from nu metal. Nevertheless, the specific genre was heavily applied to them in the '90s, so I see no reason to waffle about it and hide under the umbrella of alt metal. The guideline says "aim for generality" but the specificity of nu metal is so widely supported that we would be wrong to ignore it. We can say "nu metal (early)" if that helps the bitter pill go down. Binksternet (talk) 21:01, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nu metal genre discussed in recently published sources, 2010–14[edit]

This shows that the nu metal genre continues to be discussed in connection to the Deftones. Their 2013 concert dates were discussed as part of a nu metal revival. Even the sources which say that Deftones should not have been labeled nu metal acknowledge that it was indeed applied to them. Where there's smoke, there's fire. Binksternet (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Deftones has been refferred as a nu metal band, altough I don't approve it. Maybe some coverage should be added, that the genre is under dispute109.240.27.221 (talk) 16:36, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re-discussion: 2020[edit]

This is an old discussion, but several journalist opinions erroneously referring to something doesn't make it objective or factual; it only means there's a common misconception. Several of the above links are examples of how Deftones doesn't fit the subgenre or have been unfairly lumped together with it, which highlights the very point that they never belonged to it. Nu metal is typically characterized as angsty personal lyrics about social persecution/depression/family trauma (largely absent here), guitar/bass heavily downtuned to C or B (Deftones usually tune no further than drop-D which is a staple of various other metal genres), and typically hip-hop elements such as DJ scratching and/or rap vocals (but not all nu metal has rap vocals, and not all rap-rock is nu metal). Deftones has roughly 3 songs in their entire catalog where the vocals are unambiguously rapped (Engine No.9/Headup/Back to School). Moreno's vocal style is otherwise entirely singing/screaming or veers into shouted/whispered/spoken vocals more common in post-hardcore; Adrenaline in particular uses more post-hardcore vocal styles and guitar tones. It would be more accurate to put "post-hardcore (early)" in the genre box and remove "nu metal (early)". It certainly should be mentioned in the article that they became popular alongside the movement and often toured with nu metal bands, but it should also be mentioned that applying the label to the band itself is heavily disputed. Sources that refer to them this way do not go into specifics of the label. If people are determined to describe Deftones as nu metal in this article, they should have to reasonably prove what specific elements qualified their early material for the genre, rather than people having to prove they don't. 2604:3D08:5581:9100:38FC:1DB:2AFE:37F6 (talk) 01:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, who are you to call a genre description by professional music journalists "erroneous"? dannymusiceditor oops 02:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Many of those examples are not specifically music journalists, and several back up the claim that they're exceptions to the genre anyway. They're also from nearly a decade ago, and we have a lot more resources now to determine accurate musical analysis. For example, modern metalcore has a completely different definition than it did 20 years ago, and old metalcore is now typically labeled "crossover thrash". A similar example is Banger Films stating in the documentary series Metal Evolution that grunge is not a metal subgenre, but is part of the "story" of metal. It's perfectly viable to say that Deftones were part of the story of nu metal, but their music itself was not within the subgenre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D08:5581:9100:6D4E:CFDA:64E0:7CDB (talk) 22:59, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't really answer my question. What credentials do you have to show that you have any real idea what you're talking about? Are you a music journalist or scholar? Does your work get published by a reasonable outlet? If you do, how can you show it? If not, your personal research is invalid and not acceptable as evidence to your claim. And even if you do have credentials, my point might be entirely moot because you I doubt you'd be able to publish your own work in here due to conflict of interest. dannymusiceditor oops 01:19, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We are not here to try and figure out what the band's genre is based on what their music sounds like. Instead, we are here to tell the reader what is being said about the band in the literature. If someone wants to argue for a change in the genre, they will have to discuss the proposal in terms of what the literature is saying now and has said in the past. I don't see any such discussion here yet, so nothing is going to happen. Binksternet (talk) 02:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Genres and references[edit]

Why are the references for multiple genres all lumped together? Like, for example, "progressive rock and progressive metal, post-rock, metalgaze or post-metal" and "trip hop and glitch hop" -- these are different forms of music. "Metalgaze" is a neologism and redirects to "post-metal", which is different from post-rock, and progressive rock and progressive metal are most definitely not the same thing. Also, glitch hop is music that uses heavy sampling in a musique concrète-inspired fashion, while trip hop is a mix of electronic music, hip hop and psychedelia. The lumping of sources also makes it unclear which genres are being cited and makes it difficult to track the sources to the statements the article makes. --74.42.44.222 (talk) 00:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It needs a clean-up and is sourced poorly in the article. Just listing stuff they have been called ____(ninteen sources here) does not really help a user understand how their music sounds. Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:18, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've cleaned this up a bit with this edit, by moving the references into the Notes section. This is the best solution I could think of for this particular situation at the moment, but ideally we should follow WP:OVERCITE and whittle the references down to just the most important ones.  Adrian[232] 08:37, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work! I'm tempted to tackle a WP:OVERCITE blitz on this. - Phorque (talk) 11:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have begun whittling these down and splitting them where necessary to reduce repetition and remove the weaker references. I think a few could even be nixed entirely (eg. the references to "atmospheric" are fairly weak/unimportant when we already have 3 things saying "ambient"). - Phorque (talk) 14:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My other thought whilst going through these is that so many of these sources are just describing a single song or album. I think many of them could just be moved to the individual album pages. There are very few sources in here that are trying to describe their sound as a whole (which is what this section should be trying to do, right?). - Phorque (talk) 14:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so I did a review and check of everything with >3 sources and split and/or reduced them to a maximum of 3 citations. I think there is still loads more that could move to album articles or be omitted entirely. - Phorque (talk) 15:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Deftones. 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:

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: 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:55, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dominic Garcia's position as drummer[edit]

Where in the article does it say that he ever played drums? And where's a source saying he did? The only thing that says he played drums right now is the timeline. Unless I missed something. dannymusiceditor ~talk to me!~ 20:18, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous internet sources confirm that Garcia was the original bass player. When drummer Cunningham left in 1990 to start Phallucy, Garcia switched to drums and Cheng joined on bass. He was only the drummer for a short period before leaving to join Cunningham in Phallucy, and was replaced by Taylor. Taylor stayed on drums until Cunningham returned in 1993. Alas, these sources aren't useable as references, I think. Finding better sources may be hard as this very early period of the band is long before they got any press attention. Greg Fasolino (talk) 22:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He is definitely a drummer though as well. http://www.egcitizen.com/articles/2013/09/17/lifestyle/doc523208084ac01238096896.txt Greg Fasolino (talk) 22:32, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not 100% sure, but I think that would probably be usable. dannymusiceditor what'd I do now? 03:48, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Art Metal"[edit]

I hate to start yet another genre discussion, but I'm just curious as to other people's idea of where one would hypothetically place "art metal" or "art-metal" in the article. The term comes up again and again throughout the years in reference to Deftones:

Would "art metal" just be considered covered under "art rock" in the "Musical Influences" section? Would it be post-metal? Avant-garde metal? Progressive metal? I suppose it's not incredibly vital to the article, but it seems like its usage in reference to Deftones has only increased. I'm just curious what others think of the genre label's place in the article.Madreterra (talk) 01:25, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't oppose to adding it somewhere in the article. Since Wikipedia does not recognize "art metal" as a real genre, however, I think it shouldn't be listed as a primary genre mentioned in the musical style section, and certainly not in the infobox. But I think maybe we could mention it in the "notes." Replace one reference for "art rock" for one of these that says "art metal" and then we could list it as:"art rock" or "art metal," like "stoner rock" or "stoner metal." dannymusiceditor what'd I do now? 12:18, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My overriding feeling is that the whole genre thing is just not that important. There are so many other things needing improvement in this article. The musical style and influences section is mostly overwhelming and unhelpful at the moment. I think it needs to be reduced to the most salient points rather than added to. - Phorque (talk) 10:10, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yet another from Rolling Stone today:

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/hear-deftones-pummeling-new-song-doomed-user-20160316 Madreterra (talk) 22:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moreno's role as guitarist[edit]

I don't have a physical copy of the album, so someone will need to check for me: Do the liner notes for White Pony credit him with any guitar work? We can resolve a particular [citation needed] tag in the article rather easily if they do. I could ask the same thing about Annalynn Cunningham's participation in Around the Fur track "MX". dannymusiceditor what'd I do now? 22:51, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go. The White Pony liner notes aren't very specific but either way it does credit him with performing guitars. RHedmi (talk) 00:38, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
YES. RHedmi, you're the man. dannymusiceditor what'd I do now? 01:29, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Like (Linus) 1993[edit]

Maybe, we need to write about demo-album Like (Linus) 1993 and their style of that time. The article hasn't information about it. http://www.discogs.com/Deftones-Like-Linus/release/3379006 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deomax (talk • contribs) 20:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is this reliable?[edit]

For Frank's involvement in Decibel Devils. dannymusiceditor Speak up! 00:18, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't appear to meet the standards. It is a profile page of DJ Epik under control of the artist, making it a SPS. That would be considered to be a reliable source for DJ Epik per WP:SELFPUB, but not for anyone else.  Adrian[232] 18:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 5 June 2016[edit]

Around the Fur becomes a song in Around the Fur album. Diamond Eyes becomes a song in Diamond Eyes album. Gore becomes a song in Gore album. Adrenaline does not become a song in Adrenaline as an album. White Pony does not become a song in White Pony as an album. Deftones does not become a song in Deftones as an album. Saturday Night Wrist does not become a song in Saturday Night Wrist as an album. Koi No Yokan does not become a song in Koi No Yokan as an album.

69.24.188.210 (talk) 01:53, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is unclear exactly what change you are requesting here. Is this just an observation? If so, what's the notability? Toggling request. Please consider reformatting the request in a "Change X to Y" format for clarity. non-admin response — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 05:06, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Art metal[edit]

isn't art metal essentially art rock? dannymusiceditor Speak up! 00:50, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more concerned that whoever did the sources for that thought that a million sources helps "decide" what genres bands belong to. We should really focus on articles or whatnot that go more into detail about why the Deftones fit into specific genres instead of just ones that list them "The nu-jazz art funk band Deftones have a new album coming out" or what not. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:56, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone would like to gather up all the different sources that really discuss the genre of Deftones and organize them here on the talkpage, that would be very appreciated. I've been thinking of doing the same recently, but finding my time right now very limited. This seems to be a recurring issue, and having something neatly organized to point to might prevent future genre warring, rather than simply the lists of hundreds of sources referring to the styles that are used by the band on specific tracks or albums and whatnot.  Adrian[232] 02:51, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well can we remove art metal for now at least? It turns into a dab link. dannymusiceditor Speak up! 16:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed the art metal dab link to point to the art rock article, as it seems that's the way it's being used in the sources, and there may actually be more support for the wording of "art metal" vs "art rock". If it shouldn't be up there at all, that is a very different discussion, however.  Adrian[232] 17:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lead expanded[edit]

So what's everyone think of the new lead first paragraph? Just added 1100 bytes to it, dunno about how well it's written. dannymusiceditor Speak up! 20:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Deftones. 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:

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) 02:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Deftones. 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:

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) 06:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Deftones. 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:

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) 10:33, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Deftones. 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:

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) 02:46, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:21, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:22, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Associated Acts[edit]

I really don't see the harm in adding Chino's other bands (Palms, Team Sleep, and Crosses) and Quicksand. It helps people casually browsing the band's page find other associated material; that's the whole point. I understand that there is only one common member per band as per the GUIDELINES, which are not adamant rules and many (if not most) other band pages tend to ignore this particular bullet point since it's rather arbitrary and defeats the purpose. In fact, on the same page that guideline is listed, the example given lists Soundgarden and Temple of the Dog as Associated Acts for Audioslave, despite there only being one common member (Chris Cornell). Also, three of the four bands I listed in the first sentence have Deftones listed in their respective Associated Acts section. I believe this should be discussed and voted upon. StuOnThis (talk) 17:57, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@StuOnThis: I appreciate your willingness to discuss this. I cannot participate fully at the moment, but I will offer two thoughts: the Temple of the Dog example is in fact relevant, you are overlooking that Matt Cameron also plays for Soundgarden. Second, if you hope to gain real traction on the debate, I would recommend opening a Request for Comment, and notifying the relevant WikiProjects of this discussion. Personally, I'm flexible on the issue, but every act I've edited which maintains high quality has adamantly enforced this guideline, and I was just doing what I thought was the right thing. dannymusiceditor oops 01:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DannyMusicEditor: Thank you for responding! As for your first thought, I think you may have misread. The example given on the Musical Artist Template Info page for groups or bands shows the band Audioslave which lists both Soundgarden and Temple of the Dog as Associated Acts, both of whom only share one member to Audioslave, namely Chris Cornell. This contradicts the guideline detailed in the Associated Acts section above. While I am aware that many pages do enforce this for the sake of decluttering or general by-the-book rule enforcement, just as many do not, either for a lack of knowing that guideline or outright disregarding it. I've actually started the process of discussion to challenge this particular idea on the Musical Artist Template Info page itself as well as this one and plan on opening Requests for Comment if there is a lack of input within a certain time. I appreciate Wikipedia's standards and those like you who take the time to uphold them, but I honestly feel that the two or more members guideline robs the casual reader of upfront, pertinent information, and this page is a prime example. StuOnThis (talk) 02:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Associated acts should be strictly that, following closely the instructions at Template:Infobox_musical_artist#associated_acts. This article does not exist to help the reader find Chino's other bands. The best place for that is the footer navbox at the bottom, the Template:Deftones. You can add bands at the bottom in the section carrying related articles. Binksternet (talk) 02:11, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Binksternet:You see, that's exactly my point. Chino is the lead singer and songwriter. I'd say his other bands where he does the same thing are a pretty big, valid association. You know, the same way Soundgarden is listed as an associated act for Audioslave on their page as well as the example on the Template rules page for the same perfectly logical reason. I mean, if you want to stick to your guns and go ask permission to delete those, be my guest. I assumed the whole point in the infobox entirely was to provide quick and pertinent information and details so the reader wouldn't have to read the entire article to obtain said information. I mean, why have the band members listed if they're just in the article? Why have the active dates listed if they're in the article? Et cetera. Wikipedia is supposed to be a wealth of quickly accessible information. I don't want to have to repeat myself too much here, but I feel as though my points are being glossed over for the sake of protecting an arbitrary rule (which is contradicted on its very same page) that completely defeats the info box's sole purpose. I am genuinely shocked I'm getting so much pushback on this here and at the template talk page. StuOnThis (talk) 15:56, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I concede. I got nowhere with my case over at the Template talk page and it seems as though I'll do just as well here. Thanks for your time. StuOnThis (talk) 17:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rock instead of alternative metal as the lead genre[edit]

I think the lead genre should be "rock" instead of "alternative metal" in the lead sentence if this article and all Deftones related article. They are described as many other rock genres. In the infobox experimental rock, art rock, and shoegaze are listed. These are rock genres, bit metal genres. Rock is just more broad and appropriate for the lead. I am leaving this message because I'm sure at some point a consensus was made regarding the lead genre. I want to hear what others think. If no one responds within a week, I'll go ahead and make the changes. Bowling is life (talk) 20:01, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I would say "alternative metal" certainly is the most appropriate genre for this band. Simply putting "rock" as their main genre is extremely broad and indescriptive. At that point, you'd be throwing Deftones into the same pool as Neil Diamond and the Beach Boys. I think you should leave it as it is. We both know that if you were to change it, random editors would be changing it back every other day. Also, this is kind of a weird thing for someone of your tenure to want to do and your last couple of posts have a lot of typos in them, which is also uncharacteristic of you. Are you okay? StuOnThis (talk) 20:05, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@StuOnThis: Thanks for the response. Yes, I am fine and this isn't uncharacteristic of me. I type really fast and just tend to have a lot more typos in my posts when I edit on my phone. My edits that are labeled as "Mobile web edit" tend to have more typos. Also, this is a weird thing for someone of my tenure to want to do? So, it's weird when editors who have been on Wikipedia for a while want to make minor changes? Bowling is life (talk) 21:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, I may have you mixed up with someone else. But anyway, Deftones are definitely an alternative metal band; I wouldn't change it. StuOnThis (talk) 13:17, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm indifferent. I can see the benefit of "rock", but also agree there is overwhelming consensus they are primarily alternative metal. dannymusiceditor oops 14:47, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shoegaze as an infobox inclusion[edit]

Bowling is life brought up a good point in that shoegaze is better supported as a genre than experimental rock in this article, but Deftones' style is denser than any band I've ever worked with on Wikipedia and it's extremely difficult to encompass. Thus, I think consensus should be the only way we make any change to it. It's been a while since any proposition has been brought forward with any substance, and I want to make sure we have a good representation for the proposed change. dannymusiceditor oops 21:38, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why there's any opposition to including shoegaze in the infobox aside from not wanting to clutter it up with too many genres. Plenty of the band's catalogue can be described as such, and it's a more concisely defined genre than experimental rock. StuOnThis (talk) 16:15, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@DannyMusicEditor: I'm not saying we should remove experimental rock; I just think it wouldn't hurt to find more sources for it. The five genres, alternative metal, art rock, shoegaze, experimental rock, and nu metal, seem to cover everything without being excessive. Especially compared to how many genres are in the musical style section. Bowling is life (talk) 00:31, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
None of the three references for shoegaze currently in the article say, "Deftones is a shoegaze band." The first says their music contains "measured touches" of shoegaze and glitch-hop. The second is a quote from the lead singer of Chvrches giving her own personal opinion on what Deftones' music sounds like in a list that also includes hardcore and trip-hop. The third reference says the end of the song "Error" opens into a shoegaze section. I feel like to be included in the infobox, there needs to be an abundance of reliable sources that say very clearly and explicitly, "Deftones is a shoegaze band." If they only have shoegaze influences then this should only be mentioned in the "Musical Style" section. Fezmar9 (talk) 23:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for starting this up and suddenly bailing, I've had this on the backburner for a bit. But what Fezmar notes is also something I was noticing. I suppose the last quote I added to the third footnote for shoegaze does make it clearer. To say a part of a band's sound is an "expectation" is explicit enough in my opinion to be more prominent than the numerous other portions of the band's sound. In addition, at least two albums are described as shoegaze (Diamond Eyes and Ohms). I definitely don't think it's just influences, but nobody is going to come out and say anything to the effect of "Deftones is a shoegaze band", either, unless they're coupling it with more genres. Were it up to me, I'd prefer support on the style as a whole and consistently on albums as well - ideally more than two. (Please note that the self-titled record also is purportedly sourced as shoegaze but I'm pretty sure it's currently hanging on just "Minerva" and you have to do better than that.) dannymusiceditor oops 23:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On another note, I'm now noticing the support for "experimental rock" is (currently) quite poor. While it does satisfy what Fezmar outlined above, only one record is reliably and explicitly sourced this way (Gore), and this is the sole source cited for it here. I suppose with what we have been doing with the other genres, we could add said references from Gore to the footnote for experimental rock, but then again, I really am not sure there ever really was an "abundance" of sources for experimental rock. Really, I think we should either find more (starting with the one I mentioned) or remove it from the infobox, whichever is better, and follow this suggested practice more closely with the others as well. I think once, in recent years, I heard a contributor mention that this style needs re-done, perhaps this would make a good opportunity to re-tool the section and tune it up. (I think I probably wrote a lot to digest here so if you're confused just ask.) dannymusiceditor oops 23:43, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sergio as backing vocalist?[edit]

Is there any evidence he ever did this? He is not credited with this on any record he played on, only here. dannymusiceditor oops 23:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Deftones&oldid=1195538546"