Talk:Alice Cooper/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Glam Rock?

He wears makeup live, so why isn't there glam rock in the genres list?

lolikilledit

I broke the image, change it anyway, that's a crap picture.

the current photo really sucks.!!!!

It's a reflection of his artistry? No but that's quite rude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TangLab (talk • contribs) 18:50, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Changes to Along Came A Spider

I changed along came a spiders album info to reflect the fact that the info about the album is completely misinformed as the album isn't about Steven but rather, Spider —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devilreincarnate (talk • contribs) 07:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Stage Name

The stage name Alice Cooper was fabricated after dame Alice Kyteler from Kilkenny/Ireland who almost got burnt as a witch and fled the country overnight. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Alice_Kyteler Kyteler stems from ketiler (norse for kettle maker) or ket(t)el(l)er (flemish for kettle maker); it is not clear if her family was of Anglo-Norman or Flemish ancestry. As the name of Alice Kyteler does not sound American, a cooper was made out of the kettle maker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.185.207.162 (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

um, no.Kingevil (talk) 00:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

1974

1974 is the year when Alice Cooper obtained a legal name change. http://www.zazzle.co.uk/alicecooper/about If anyone cares to actually mention it in the intro or the body of the article... Israell (talk) 06:34, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Royalty Paid To Other Band Members Regarding The Usage Of The Name Alice Cooper

I remember reading an interview 10-15 years ago with one of the original band memembers of the Alice Cooper Band. He said he was paid 3% of the gross revenu per year that Alice Cooper (Vincent Fournier) made. I don't have the article so I will not post it. Maybe someone else could clarify on this. Thought it was interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.138.252 (talk) 17:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

there is ZERO factual information to back up how much alice's original band makes, currently, from the 'alice cooper' brand. therefore, it is useless to mention any amount, or guess how much it could be. i'm deleting the part about the old band members being able to 'live comfortably' from their share of the money, as there is no proof of this, and 'comfortable' is a relative term.Kingevil (talk) 22:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

There is no justification for deleting it, especially when another user has indicated that a reference exists but that he cannot get details of it. It's much better to add a "citation needed" tag. Jprw (talk) 10:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

until a reference can be found, it should NOT be listed. especially worded the way it was. are you sure you know what an encyclopedia is??Kingevil (talk) 20:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The "citation needed" tag is an accepted way of recording references in Wikipedia. This is not KingEvilpedia -- your whole approach is far too aggressive and subjective. Jprw (talk) 10:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

my approach is 'subjective' as it aligns itself with the truth. WHY WOULD YOU MENTION A TOPIC THAT STILL HAS NOT PROVEN TO BE REMOTELY TRUE??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? BECAUSE OF SOMEONE WHO 'ONCE SAW' AN ARTICLE ABOUT IT???????????? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT WIKIPEDIA IS ABOUT.Kingevil (talk) 17:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

In reference to

Since "Alice Cooper" was originally the name of the band, and not the lead singer (e.g. Uriah Heep, Jethro Tull, Meat Loaf, etc.), and it was actually owned by the band as whole

I think this line needs either severe editing or removing as it seems to say that the bands listed are the names of the lead singers where in fact the examples given have contradictory histories. (Tull is a band name based on an historical person, Heap is a band name based on a literary character and Meat Loaf is, depending on sources, either a changed name or a stage name)220.101.34.149 (talk) 01:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC) ABell

photo

the current photo is hideous!! i'll upload a new one to commons.Kingevil (talk) 22:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

never mind. i won't be doing that. can someone please post a more appropriate photo?Kingevil (talk) 02:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I really, really want to see a new photo added ... we have two similar recent portraits of Vince, but nothing showing what Alice Cooper looked like to his fans during performances and other public appearances. Get a good shot with the band and make-up, in drag or not, but soon! (I'd submit or post one if I had one.) 71.249.251.152 (talk) 00:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

rnr hof induction petitions from fans

removed this entire entry as it's irrelevant. also, there have been MANY attempts at getting alice inducted into the hof, not just two. let it also be known that these 'fan petitions' do more HARM than good.Kingevil (talk) 03:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

you still revert this change, yet give no explanation here, as to why you feel it needs to stay? waiting.....Kingevil (talk) 17:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

no trilogy

despite what some reviewers and critics think, dragontown was NOT the third part of a trilogy, also including the last temptation and brutal planet. alice had mentioned the idea of a trilogy starting with brutal planet. however, alice went in a different direction after dragontown, with the eyes of alice cooper.Kingevil (talk) 03:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

It is clearly a trilogy reflecting his personal faith perspective. It's easy to hack off well researched references and replace them with your own biased and highly subjective take on events. I will restore the original reference. Jprw (talk) 07:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

wow. you really don't have a gasp of alice cooper history. alice's old, crappy record label incorrectly stated dragotown was the 3rd part of a trilogy. however, that has been retracted, and it is well-known that the 'trilogy' was supposed to start with brutal planet. it has NOTHING to do with his faith perspective.

http://www.sickthingsuk.co.uk/albums/a-dt.php

end of story.Kingevil (talk) 20:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

EVEN MORE PROOF THAT YOU'RE WRONG!!!!

http://www.hmmagazine.com/exclusive/alice_cooper_part_2200304/index.php

"The funny thing was that The Last Temptation really wasn't part of the trilogy. That was on its own. That was the first thing I wrote as a Christian. And then, it was six years before I wrote Brutal Planet. Brutal Planet was a whole different story. Brutal Planet was a story that was talking about, 'What's the world like? Let's get a picture of the future 50 years from now, when all of the systems have failed, church, family, school, politics, every system has failed, and there's no God. Let's say that no one believes in God. Well, what have we got? Now we've got Brutal Planet this horrible place that nobody wants to be.' That's what that album was about. Dragontown was part two of that, which was a little bit more character driven. I was kind of like showing you characters that are there. The point on that one is, 'You can even be a nice guy and be in Hell. The road to Hell is littered with nice guys with good intentions.' Part three is in the works right now."Kingevil (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

That is Alice's subjective opinion. Looking at his long career and numerous albums, the three albums are his first overtly Christian records, and they all come one after another. So a more objective assessement would be that they do indeed form a kind of trilogy. Jprw (talk) 11:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

ok, so you know more than alice cooper, about alice cooper? lol. and now they are 'kind of' a trilogy????????? since when does 'kind of' information belong in an encyclopedic article?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! you amaze me.Kingevil (talk) 17:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

reunion section

the date of the alice cooper/alice cooper group 'reunion' was 10/23/1999, not 1998. changed the date. also, i deleted this incorrect statement about the christmas pudding 'reunion':

"The 2006 reunion was by far the biggest and most complete reunion involving some rehearsals."

the 1999 event also featured rockin' reggie on backing vocals. this was the first 'reunion' of sorts.

additionally, the absence of a second guitar player wasn't 'in honor of their fallen friend.' it was obvious that putting someone else in that position would detract from the purpose of a 'reunion.'

michael bruce has played with alice on at least two occasions.

the whole section is horribly written and incorrect. i'm changing it.Kingevil (talk) 01:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

makeup

alice has has two types of makeup styles. the first is referred to as the 'spider eye' makeup. the second, alice has dubbed 'demented clown' makeup. there has NEVER been 'snake eyes' makeup.

jprw - do some research before you make any further changes to this article. otherwise, it is just considered vandalism.Kingevil (talk) 01:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Where is your reliable source to the "demented clown" makeup reference—i.e., where is your own research? Actually it your own editing of the Alice Cooper page that better fits a description of vandalism, as you chop things out with no justification whatsoever. Jprw (talk) 10:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

again, WRONG!! reference was listed. end of story. can you show me anything that refers to his makeup as 'snake eyes?' no, you can't, because no reliable source has ever referred to it as such!!

http://www.sickthingsuk.co.uk/musicians/m-alice.php

"Alice's make-up is copyrighted in some shape or manner. There was no specific reasoning for the design. It kind of developed out of a demented clown puppet thing I once heard him say." (Brian Nelson, October 1995) Kingevil (talk) 20:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

sill waiting for your source that his makeup has EVER been referred to as 'snake eyes.'Kingevil (talk) 17:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Google Alice Cooper and snake eyes -- you'll get about a dozen references. The Brian Nelson reference above is weak to say the least. Jprw (talk) 11:57, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

religion

"Although he tends to shy away from speaking publicly of his faith,"

oh really????? a good portion of his latest book mentions his faith. every time he mentions his charity, he is 'speaking publicly of his faith,' since his charity is formed around christian beliefs. even their logo has a cross in it!!!! fact remains - alice has no qualms with speaking about his religion, and does so when given the opportunity.Kingevil (talk) 02:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

still waiting for your proof that alice cooper shys away from speaking about his faith.Kingevil (talk) 17:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Third opinion

There was a notice on the page requesting third opinions, s I came here to take a look, but I am having difficulty seeing what the exactly points of conflict are. Could one or both sides use this section of the talk page to summarize what's under dispute and what they'd ilke to see as a solution? Thanks. DreamGuy (talk) 18:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This is just ridiculous

Why don't we include garage rock and glam rock in the infobox with the other genres? Those genres have references and we are all aware about the fact that Alice Cooper has been one of the most popular artists representing those genres. That is a fact that we all know. Even Cooper himself considers his music as glam rock and especially as garage rock. His own Myspace profile says that his music is garage rock sounding. So I don't see any reason why some of you delete garage rock and glam rock away from the infobox. I thought that wikipedia is based on facts. So why won't that matter in this article about Alice Cooper? Garage rock and glam rock are just as important genres in his career as are hard rock, heavy metal and shock rock. I'm adding a consensus right here right now. Oh wait, we don't need any consensus at all because there is only one right answer folks. So, my question is this: Why do you delete referenced and cited material even if wikipedia is based on facts??? ---JNCooper —Preceding undated comment added 12:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC).

Alice Cooper had garage rock roots. But never released anything that sounded much like garage rock until recent years. Glam rock describes a look. But doesn't describe a specific musical style. A genre isn't about looks. He was a glam rock "performer" with regards to his early look onstage. But that has nothing to do with the music itself. When it boils righ down to it... He is first and foremost a heavy metal/hard rock musician. Plain and simple. Even Shock rock doesn't describe his music... just his look. His dabblings into new wave and pop are minimal. The box is just an overview and does not need superfluous style testing like garage rock or new wave etc. He is heavy metal... he is hard rock... when he does ballads (which he has a lot of those)... he is rock. Keep it simple stu.. etc The Real Libs-speak politely 13:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

He hasn't been garage rock in his solo career until recent years like you said. But The Alice Cooper band played mostly garage rock when they were active in the late 60's and early 70's. They had their heavy metal and hard rock sound too but as Alice himself has said they were a Detroit garage rock band with the glam image. You're absolutely right about glam rock. It's not a musical style. But then shouldn't we delete glam rock from the infoboxes of David Bowie, T. Rex or Slade too??? I mean if we did that those articles would be incomplete because glam style was a huge part of the image of those artists. And it was a big part of Cooper's image too so that's my point why it should be added to the infobox. If glam rock doesn't belong to the infoboxes then please delete it from every other glam performer's infobox and not just Alice Cooper's. I can cope with the fact that glam rock isn't in the infobox, but garage rock is the one that really needs to be included. Cooper was one of the three famous garage rock bands from Detroit together with MC5 and The Stooges. I mean what would Alice Cooper think if he saw this article about himself and he doesn't see garage rock as one of his most important genres even if he has said that they were mostly a raw garage rock band? ---JNCooper 23:39, 9 June 2009 (UTC).

::::The Alice Cooper band's first two albums were a mix a psychedelic rock and early heavy metal. And their peak years from Love it to Death up to the original band breakup were classic heavy metal and hard rock. There is no garage rock in any of those early albums. Cooper's solo career started out in a lighter rock style but went right back to hard rock and heavy metal for the last 25 years. David Bowie has experimented with many more musical styles than Alice Cooper ever did. His glam years were short lived compared to the length of his career and the number of styles he has played. If this were the David Bowie talk page I would bring that up for discussion. But since this is the Alice Cooper talk page the content of another Wikipedia article has no bearing on what content is represented here. Each article is different and the consensus for one may not be the case for another. As it is in the case. Aussie Ausborn (talk) 23:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Striking sock Rockgenre (talk) 01:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree with JNCooper. Garage rock needs to be in the infobox. Consensus!!!! Alice is widely known as a shock rocker whose music is a mix of garage rock, hard rock and heavy metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.195.250.205 (talk) 22:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

You are agreeing with yourself? I don't think users should add a comment using an account. And then come back and agree with themselves later using an IP address. The previous contibutor's posts make sense. I think the infobox contains enough accurate information and doesn't need anything more added to it. Wether B (talk) 01:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC) Striking sock Rockgenre (talk) 01:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC) :The same editor keeps coming back with different IP numbers and new accounts and re-inserting the information that we agreed to leave out. It could be the same editor who started this post and then used an IP to make it look like more than one person saw it his way. Can someone do a check user on these IPs? The page is fine just as it is. It isn't worth having to babysit the page just so one IP opinion pusher doesn't sneak in and add unneeded text. Aussie Ausborn (talk) 01:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC) Striking sock Rockgenre (talk) 01:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I will get a CU done if he returns and have all of his IPs and accounts blocked. The Real Libs-speak politely 13:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Glam rock does describe a sound as well as a look. Alice Cooper did adopt that sound so it should be in the infobox. And garage rock was a big part of his music so that should also definatley be in the infobox. You could also consider adding psychdelic rock to the infobox too. DooDahDave (talk) 15:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC) I mean, come on the two facts are well sourced. DooDahDave (talk) 15:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe we should just strip it down to just "rock". DooDahDave (talk) 09:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Rock is used correctly in the article lead-in. A few obvious specifics are allowed in the infobox. Alice Cooper is primarily a heavy metal/hard rock performer. So it is perfectly fine to have those 2 genres listed. Rock covers the artist/band's lighter material. Shock rock should be removed because the field is for genres and not "terms" and shock rock is just a term and not a specific genre of music. Anyone want to agree to that. 3 main genres is more than enough. The Real Libs-speak politely 13:51, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

George Starostin's reviews classify albums like Killer, Love it to Death, and The Eyes of, as Garage Rock. He even calls Alice Cooper the "Original Garage Rock Band" thanks to "Eighteen" 99.54.88.194 (talk) 16:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Garage rock clearly belongs in the info box. That this is even debated is mind boggling. Alice Cooper was one one of the original Detroit garage rock bands. DragonsDream (talk) 16:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Adding of a seperate page for the Alice Cooper band

Should there be a seperate page for the Alice Cooper band apart from the Alice Cooper person page? I tried to create one and it told me to come here to talk about whether I should do so. What does everyone think of this idea? DooDahDave (talk) 15:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

There is plenty of information on this page about the band. If the article was too long and req'd a content split then perhaps it could happen. But the band article would still have to conform with the same content consensus that is already in place with this article. IE: no retarded 'garage rock'/'glam rock' nonsense. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I think there should be a separate page for the original band. Alice Cooper, the person, and Alice Cooper, the band that he belonged to before using the name for his solo career, are two different entities. They should have separate articles. If not for any other reason, in order to let people know the difference. And there is note saying that the article has become too long and should be split.David (talk) 18:33, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Nah. Alice Cooper the band has had no existence apart from Alice Cooper the now-solo artist, and this article explains ad nauseum the erstwhile supposed distinction between the two -- it could be shortened considerably by trimming junk just on that issue alone. Steveozone (talk) 23:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Claims that they are one in the same are just ignorance. Speaking purely from a musical perspective (Which is I guess subjective, so feel free to plug your ears and make loud noises) the two incarnations are totally separate. But, in 1974 the band Alice Cooper broke up, at which point Vincent Furnier legally changed his name to Alice Cooper and started his own solo career. Sharing a name does not make the two the same entity. 99.54.88.194 (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Alice Cooper, the band, has been nominated for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame this year. Alice Cooper, the person, has not been nominated as a solo artist. So if "Alice Cooper" is inducted, it will be for the work of Alice Cooper, the band. Work by Alice Cooper, the person, outside of the band is not part of the basis for the nomination, but could be used in the future to nominate Alice Cooper, the person. So yes, they are two separate entities, whether or not they need two articles.142 and 99 (talk) 19:29, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Alice Cooper the band was long before Vince changed his name to Alice Cooper. Wikipedia, forever wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.93.23.246 (talk) 00:59, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Restaurant?

Why is there no mention of his restaurant anywhere in this article? - Adolphus79 (talk) 14:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Alice's Restaurant? There's a song about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.76.202 (talk) 23:25, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Where you can get anything you want, I suppose. Jonathunder (talk) 03:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

In all seriousness, a mention should be made of Cooperstown. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 23:43, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Splitting the article

What do other editors think about dividing this article into two separate articles:

• Alice Cooper, the man himself, his solo career, briefly dealing with his time with the original band
• The Alice Cooper Band just focusing on the band

It's beginning to look like a logical choice. Jprw (talk) 15:16, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense to me too.. agreed.. JSL595 (talk) 18:48, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I just came here hoping to find an article on just the original band. Spitting it makes perfect sense to me. Had The original been called the The Alice Cooper Band or had Mr. Furnier not changed his name, the idea of keeping the band and the solo career in one article would be ridiculous. Tom Petty is not the same as Tom Petty and the Heartbreaks and the band known as Alice Cooper is a different entity than the solo artist known as Alice Cooper.DragonsDream (talk) 15:56, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Totally. Start a new article. The Alice Cooper Group, 1966-74. 76.93.23.246 (talk) 19:42, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Done. If you are wikipedian and feel you could speed up he process please do . 76.93.23.246 (talk) 20:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Alice_Cooper_Group_1966-1974#The_Alice_Cooper_Group

Named after a Mayberry RFD character?!

I see this in the article, in reference to Cooper's creation of the band name:

(lifted from a "Mayberry RFD" character)

Where's the evidence for this? The citation listed for the claim does not back this point up. And the character did not appear on the television show until 1969, a year after the band name change. Docwyoming (talk) 19:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)docwyoming

Without a source, I'm going to go ahead and strike the reference. Besides, what you said about the timeline (i.e. "Alice Cooper Band" pre-dating the introduction of the character on Mayberry RFD) seems to be correct. Ynot4tony2 (talk) 23:48, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I do see this later in the article: "In January 1972, Cooper was again asked about his peculiar name, and told talk show hostess Dinah Shore that he took the name from a "Mayberry RFD" character." However, I think it was a joke, as again, the character does not appear until after he began using the name, and Cooper gives a rather lengthy explanation about how the character and name were really created prior to 1969.

72.189.255.153 (talk) 02:28, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Docwyoming

Picture

Am I the only one thinking the main picture should be one of him in his stage makeup? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealthysis (talk • contribs) 03:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Help creating the Alice Cooper Group

Im not a regular wiki person so I would appreciate help cleaning up this submission as recommended by the wiki mods. Here is the article and their suggestions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Alice_Cooper_Group_1966-1974 The problem of course that Alice Cooper was the name of the band. It wasn't till later the the lead singer changed his name. to Alice Cooper76.93.23.246 (talk) 08:25, 16 June 2012 (UTC)