Talk:Amaranthe

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Metal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal articles

Melodic Death Metal?

I don't think just occasionally having growls makes your band a death metal band does it? --Jezzapandd (talk) 00:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't, but Melodic Death Metal is a fairly broad genre. They also fit the power metal bill. Basically for easy of categorization we should choose one because Modern Metal does not give a good understanding of how they sound. --OrionPSG1 (talk) 06:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC -06:00)

Melodic death metal is bands like Bloodbath, At The Gates, Carcass and power metal are heavy non poppy bands like Gamma Ray, Helloween or Grave Digger and Amaranthe sound nothing like them, they are metalcore mixed with heavy pop and nothing else, so they are not not metal to be honest, don't you agree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.199.4.64 (talk) 20:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Librarius Metallicus lists them as death metal/european power metal, Encyclopaedia Metallum says Power metal/metal core. In this interview Elize Ryd calls them "Dance-metal with a taste of death and modern/melodic metal." Other sources I've checked seem to be varied on if they are death metal or metalcore, but most of them seem to agree that they are at least in part power metal. Chaos Ancient (talk) 22:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Calling Amaranthe Melodic Death Metal is like calling Britney Spears Metal, because she did a cover on Joan Jetts "I love rock and roll". The only part of Amaranthe's music that might be considered "Death'ish" are the occasional Growl's, but that hardly makes their music much related to Death metal. Where are the blast beats, tremolo's, lyrical themes etc? Listen to for example At the Gates and please explain how Amaranthe can be compared to them? A blog stating that it thinks Amaranthe is Melo Death is hardly a definitive source. Im editing the page, please explain why Amaranthe should be considered melo death before reverting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.136.206 (talk) 16:41, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to Elize Ryd's interview, where she was asked what genre Amaranthe falls under, her quote regarding Amaranthe's sound is, verbatim, "[d]ance-metal with a taste of death and modern/melodic metal." We can quibble about whether this is an accurate description of their sound, but at least such a quote should pass muster for inclusion in the Wikipedia article, which should be taken more into account than an assumption that she describes their sound as 'melodic death metal.' (Quote from the Wikipedia article, not from the interview source material.) AdequateNBAfan (talk) 06:29, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Logo and "copyright"

File:Amaranthe - Logo.svg is a public domain image under {{PD-textlogo}} as it fails to meet the threshold of originality, it consisting of solely text in various fonts.

@DannyMusicEditor: On English Wikipedia, we follow U.S. trademark law, explained by the licensing template {{PD-textlogo}}, which states that simple text logos are under the public domain. The file File:Amaranthe - Logo.svg is claimed to be self vectorized, so the vectorized image is PD per the filemaker. The original image underneath the vectorization is simple text, so is not protected under the claim that it was removed under. COMMONS does not even allow copyright violations, so if you think the file is a trademark or copyright violation, you should lodge a claim there, and it will disappear. This can easily be seen by other textual corporate logos, See the IBM logo File:IBM logo.svg which is public domain, thus we can use it at IBM. You can contact COMMONS at commons:Commons:Deletion requests

Even if we need to use the image under a claim of fair-use, we can still use such images, such as found at Sunoco, where an image is the logo for the company, and clearly appears on the page, with File:Sunoco USA.svg being a copyrighted trademark. So, for both cases (PD or fair-use) we may use it in this article. If we need a fair-use claim it can be written, but since the logo is residing on Commons, a prima facia case can be made that no such claim is needed, and we can just use it as is.

-- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 05:40, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I was concerned is that I have seen a couple of discussions, one of which I can link to (Breaking Benjamin) Theirs was not text-based. It was ultimately rejected because there were no sources describing it or its significance. I thought that this applied to all logos, though. I suppose I can leave this to another person to determine if it is illegal for use on Wikipedia. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 11:37, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amaranthe. 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/20131216204753/http://finnishcharts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Amaranthe to http://finnishcharts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Amaranthe

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) 17:54, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline Error

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post this, but the timeline seems to be messed up. There are lines, where they should not be. Sadly I am not knowledgable enough to fix this on my own. Would someone please take a look at it? --194.187.249.40 (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]