Talk:Marilyn Manson (band)/Archive 2

New lineup

Should mention that Twiggy is now the guitarist and the new bassist is Andy Gerold. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.231.202 (talk) 14:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Idiot grammar

Someone's too much in love with the ampersand in this article. Wtf? --TorbenFrost 13:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

So fix it. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Once again "eponymous" is used in yet another Wiki/AMG writeup. Its tiresome to read that same word on every subject on Wiki. Must be an inside joke.

So fix it. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Paintings

I didn't find any reference to his paintings. Should we open a section for it ? --Julien 03:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that's an excellent idea.--Jimmyjrg 03:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

A reference already exists at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilyn_Manson_%28person%29#Art_career , where it belongs. This article is for the band, not the man himself. 68.235.174.142 04:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I just realised that, it gets confusing sometimes --Jimmyjrg 13:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Dita Von Teese

Why is Dita Von Teese completely missing from the article? It seems they married on December 3, 2005 ([1])? Could anybody add more about his personal life? Thanks -- Chris 73 | Talk 10:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I see, it's only about the band. My mistake. -- Chris 73 | Talk 10:16, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Band members

Daisy

Please be aware, for future refrence, Daisy Berkowitz is/has been credited with programming, drums, bass, guitar, and also some lyrics(only from the spooky kids era) his voice is also on My Monkey.

This is undebatable as its in the POAF credits. Gein did do SOME bass but he didnt write too much for Marilyn Manson as he was booted before they could work together more.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Synthetic coma (talk • contribs) 07:20, December 16, 2005 (UTC).

Any particular reason, then, that the credits for Portrait read "All bass by Gidget Gein"? --keepsleeping say what 17:14, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Besides, it's not even an issue, because the article lists each member and his primary instrument. Pogo plays theremin on Portrait; it's not in the list. Manson plays pan flute on Antichrist Superstar and harpsichord on Holy Wood; that's not in the list. Daisy played guitar and, because he was responsible for most of the Spooky Kids-era programming, he's also credited with that. --keepsleeping say what 17:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Anyway, to prevent edit warring on this article, I've added the following lines following the personnel list:

Most, if not all, members of the band have contributed performances (either live or in-studio) on instruments other than their primary ones. For instance, Gacy has played theremin and calliope, Manson has played pan flute and harpsichord, and Berkowitz has been credited with bass guitar, drum machines, and vocals. Further details on these contributions can be found in the individual members' articles and in the articles on the band's albums. --keepsleeping say what 17:47, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Manson is credited with the Pan flute.

It meant Gein recorded the album. I guess it depends on how detailed you want it, do you want it about what the person contributed, or what the person played live?

For the record, Id consider that a Primary contribution. It was only Daisy Pogo and Manson for most of the time before getting signed. Bassists (as you can see in the former members) had been in and out.

That's incorrect. Olivia Newton Bundy was only bassist for a brief time period, and then it was Gidget Gein for the next 3-4 years or so, right up until after POAAF was recorded, but before it was released. He wasn't present at the release party. I'd say two bassists over the majority of their history doesn't qualify as "in and out." heavensblade23 23:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Pogo's status in the band.

I know that Pogo is having some kind of personal problem and that he is being replaced by Chris Vrenna on keyboards for the tour, but i can't find him on either the 'Current Members' or 'Former Members' list. Shouldn't Pogo's name be on one of those lists? What's up with this?

Pogo is no more! --Manson_0015 God Of Fuck! 20:39, 29 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manson 0015 (talk • contribs)

Genre

It should be decided which music genre Manson is as it seems every few weeks to get changed between "nu metal" and "alternative", I feel he is either alternative or rock, isn't nu metal more like Linkin Park and even Limp Bizkit?

It's more hard rock than anything. That's the definition I've always used, and that's the definition I've seen used the most. Calling the band nu metal, though, is ridiculous - it displays almost none of the qualities associated with nu metal. ~ Dead 03:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It's far from being nu metal. Jeremyh 22:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC) nah ive always said its shock rock or even glam, as it has alot of influences from these sorts of bands.

Well they have alot of Glam influences, but they're only really "Glam" on Mechanical Animals, the thing with Manson, they play a different variation of music each album, I think the most general term would be "Industrial Rock".... as the core seems to be predominatly Hard rock with some Industrial. - Deathrocker 19:53, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I think Industrial Metal, but it is also Industrial Rock. New metal is just wrong, and I dont think alternative is quite right either. -BugsyAbsolute

I think that industrial metal is a more accurate genre to describe his music than industrial rock. DavidJJJ 10:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. Alternative metal, sure, since the band clearly fits the description in that article. But in comparison to "mainstream" industrial rock bands like Nine Inch Nails and KMFDM, you find a lot more elements in common with Marilyn Manson than you would between MM and industrial metal artists like Ministry. They're really more of a hard rock band than a heavy metal band to begin with, but, in the end, the truth is that they draw from many different styles and they shift genres frequently, and that's mentioned in the article. --keepsleeping slack off! 15:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

These genre wars are hard to stop. I went by the categorisation at the All Music Guide and hopefully that quells it a bit. -- Reaper X 23:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson is classified as nu metal on Rockdetector [2]; I think that nu metal should be added to the list of genres. I would consider putting it before the others since I have always known Marilyn Manson as a nu metal artist/band. Now if this causes problems with certain fans, I'm willing to let it slip to the bottom of the list of genres, but I strongly feel that Nu metal should be added there. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 21:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm a fairly hardcore Manson fan, and I do not agree with the nu-metal classification. He do not rap, or use turntables in any of his songs. Shock rock/alternative metal has always been my choice of genres for him. Nickoladze 03:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

True, but System of a Down or Soulfly are often labeled nu metal even though they do not use turntables. And Manson does use rap-sounding vocals in some of his songs (This Is The New Hit, for example). Since a reputated source like Rockdetector classifies Manson as nu metal, I think it is legitimate for this genre to be listed in the infobox. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 10:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Why not use a blanket statement like "The band's work is hard to categorize, as their overall sound changes from album to album" or something to that affect? It would probably help settle this issue and hopefully stop the constant arguing that comes up with every Manson album/ single/ new fan who has a different opinion of what each genre technically is.- to tough to die 13:19, 4 February 2007

Well, I wouldn't do that, because first of all I don't agree with the statement, but also because I don't think the genre is controversial/complex enough to add a paragraph describing how the genre is debated. Bands like H.I.M. who have a very disputed and hard-to-categorize style have such paragraphs, which I think is the best way to deal with such a problem. I don't think that this problem is present on this article. We all know approximately what genre Marilyn Manson belongs to. I think simply adding Nu metal in the infobox would be alright. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 20:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay this is the last call... ^^ If anyone has a reasonable reason to tell me why Nu metal shouldn't be on there, may that person say it :) I have a source that has a very good reputation, so I think it should be enough. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 16:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Instead, write up a section for the article about his varying genres, and have the infobox say "Debated", and link to to that section. Nickoladze 04:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes I have considered this option. However, I do not think that Manson's genre is that hard to catetgorize. There is no real debate around his musical genre. We pretty much all know that his music is a mix of shock rock and other rock subgenres. Adding nu metal to the list is legitimate because Rockdetector classifies the band as such. Encyclopaedia Metallum does not have Manson in its database because it considers it mallcore (which is a derogatory for nu metal and metalcore). I would also like to say that adding nu metal to the list is by no way an attack on Manson's reputation. The fact that I despise Marilyn Manson does not have anything to do with my actions. I'm not doing this against him (or the article, for that matter), and I am keeping my personal opinion of him aside. I hope you understand. Now could you give me a good reason why nu metal should not be added to the list? Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 09:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Simple, he doesn't use turntables, and he doesn't "rap" (although I guess you could say he has a few influences on of it on his latest album.) Examples of Nu-Metal would be Linkin Park, KoRn, and Limp Bizkit. If you listen to a track by them, then one by Manson, you will see pretty much no similarities. His lastest album, The Golden Age of Grotesque, sounds different because of the addition of John 5, and he brought with him Industrial music influences from his work with KMFDM. Nickoladze 19:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

As I have already said, he does rap in certain songs, notably "This is the new shit". And nu metal bands like System of a Down or Disturbed do not use turntables as well. They are still nu metal. Rockdetector is a recognized website created by a musicologist that classifies most of the rock bands. If such a great source describes Marilyn Manson as nu metal, I think it probably has its place in the infobox. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 20:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think System of a Down nor Disturbed are Nu-Metal. In my mind, Nu-Metal is just a genre used to classify KoRn, Linkin Park, and Limp Bizkit, but then just overused by heavy metal fans as a derogatory term. SoaD doesn't rap, so why are they Nu-Metal? Sure, maybe Marilyn Manson raps in "This is the New Shit", but have you listened to any of his previous album? "The Golden Age of Grotesque" is completely different than all his other works, and each of his other albums differs from each other slightly. Shock Rock and Alternative Rock/Metal are the only genres I believe should be given to Marilyn Manson. Oh and earlier when I said John 5 brought KMFDM influences, I meant Tim Skold, sorry. Nickoladze 23:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Industrial rock is more fitting than Industrial metal; some influence is derived from heavy metal (Sabbath, Motley Crue) but as has been mentioned, if you compare them to bands from industrial rock & industrial metal, they are more closely tied to the former. - Deathrocker 17:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well unfortunately, it isn't about what either of us think, but about what the sources say. Disturbed doesn't rap nor use turntables, but they are still classified as nu metal. And nu metal is not a derogatory term, it's the genre. Mallcore is the derogatory term you're looking for. I am not looking to attack Marilyn Manson's image or reputation by adding nu metal, but I was just fairly surprized when I saw that nu metal wasn't on there. And after quick research, I found out that nu metal is fairly often attributed to MM. I insist to add nu metal to the list. However, if it can make things better, I am willing to leave it at the bottom of the list and/or clarify in the introduction something like: "Marilyn Manson's genre is sometimes disputed: some sources label him as nu metal, but others as alternative" or whatever. But I think that the last proposition would compromise the quality of the introduction... It would be just simpler to add nu metal in the infobox. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 17:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Plus, as Deathrocker clearly pointed out, shock rock is not a musical form. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 17:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Alright go ahead then, doesn't matter. Nickoladze 18:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your cooperation ^^ Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 18:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson are no more nu-metal than Nine Inch Nails are... I think its fair to have the genres as "Industrial rock, Alternative rock" and maybe, Hard rock. The only connection they have to nu-metal is time-frame of success; they are not widley or historically regarded as part of that movement. There are numerous genres that the band has experimented with (1970s glam rock for example) that describe their musical characteristics more correctly than "nu-metal".

As mentioned further up on this talkpage[3] there is clearly heavy metal influence in this band's music (and that is already mentioned in the article)... but their own music style is more closely related to those in Industrial rock (KMFDM, Nine Inch Nails) the Reznor connections are obvious (he produced their most famous album) also White is currently playing in NIN.. Skold has played in both KMFDM and Manson; they are interlinked.

The situation of Marilyn Manson's genre in relation to heavy metal, is similar to that of Guns N' Roses, there is some influence from heavy metal; but they also drag more prominent influences from elsewhere making them more closely related to hard rock lineage. - Deathrocker 18:21, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I would definitely not classify Marilyn Manson as hard rock... Comparing his music to that of AC/DC or Led Zep is (in my opinion) a big stretch... And do you have better sources than Rockdetector that classifies Marilyn Manson as hard rock? Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 18:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

His band was listed in, and he himself made an appearence on the "100 Greatest Artists of Hard Rock" documentary [4]. The 5 hour film also featured appearences from members of KISS, Aerosmith, Queen, Van Halen. - Deathrocker 19:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

If no one else shows any opposition, I guess you could add hard rock. But I still feel that nu metal should be added... Especially with such a reputated source like Rockdetector. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 19:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Rockdetector also list Cradle of Filth as Black metal; if we are going to start listing bands into genre they don't belong, just because of one source. Ignoring the facts of their musical characteristics... then I'm sure I can easily find one where Rage Against The Machine are described as nu-metal and we'll change that one too shall we?[5] - Deathrocker 19:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

"No, not some corporate giant (surprising how many people think it is!), just your average Heavy Metal fan, Garry Sharpe-Young. What is Rockdetector? Well, it’s an information service really, a place where fans and musicians can learn about Rock music past, present & future. I’m often asked Who? What? Why? So, here we go…" This is from rock detector's FAQ. So someone please tell me what makes this guy a "source" at all, he seems just like any of us except he has a site. If I had the time to make a site, does that make me a professional? I mean really, he listed HIM as goth rock! If you read his FAQ, he stresses more about how his "My thirst for knowledge of all things Metal". So even if we could say this guy is a reputable source, he clearly is limited in his knowledge of the entire landscape that is rock itself for metal is a small part of the grander genre of rock. So while I suppose he may be good at citing JUST metal bands (which would include marilyn manson, i admit)as he seems to mainly do work in that area (I will admit he said he had a magazine article), I do not think rockdetecter seems to be a good source at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.166.222.104 (talk) 00:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC).

Well Marilyn Manson is definitely more nu metal than hard rock! I would actually say that Marilyn Manson is mallcore, but since it is a derogatory term, it obviously shouldn't be used in here. As for COF, the genre is debated. I agree that it is not black metal (properly speaking). But I also think that the closest metal genre you can group them with is symphonic black metal. And for RATM, they have a pretty unique style, and it is understandable that the mainstream audience confuses RATM's style with that of other bands/artists they see on the same TV channels or hear on the same radio stations. You can also find sources indicating that Sonata Arctica is death metal and that Slipknot is brutal death metal... Rockdetector on the other hand, does a pretty good job at describing the bands' genres in a concise way. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 20:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Read the article on nu-metal, its cultural origins are stated as the mid-1990s; this band started in 1989. Korn are always stated as the originators of that genre by music critics, they didn't start until four years after Marilyn Manson, and have an entirely different musical sound.

Also for arguments sake, reading nu-metal's musical characteristics.. Rage Against the Machine are linked to nearly all of the ones listed, whereas Marilyn Manson are linked to less than half of them.

On your page you state clearly that you despise the band in question and even deride them as "mallcore" so why try edit an encyclopedic article on them, that is supposed to be neutral? Seems an odd thing to do. - Deathrocker 21:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I put my personal opinions on the side. I'm not trying to make this article less good (if I didn't care about the quality, I would've made a "debated genre" section), but I'm trying to include the genres that are noted by big sources. Rockdetector is a big source. Plus, Wikipedia is editable by everyone (as long as their edits are not ruining the encyclopedia), and I am pretty sure that includes people who are not fond of the subject. If you think I am being unfair and trying to ruin the article, you are making a wrong judgement. Nu metal is by no means a derogatory term and does not ruin the subject's reputation. I have read the article about nu metal. So you would put RATM in nu metal... I say that RATM does not have a specific genre shared by other bands. In the same way that Mr. Bungle or Faith No More doesn't. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 22:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

RATM, Faith No More, and Marilyn Manson all fit under the alternative metal genre. And, as pointed out, Marilyn Manson's breakthrough predates nu metal's by more than two years. As far as reliable sources, Allmusic uses alternative metal to cover early 90s bands as well as nu metal, but Marilyn Manson was a contemporary of the mid-90s alternative rock scene at its height, so "alternative metal" should be a fine enough labeling. WesleyDodds 12:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh well... I guess adding nu metal is not possible. :) Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 09:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to say the band is metal, rather than rock. Antichrist Superstat, Holy Wood and GAOG are all way more metal than rock. Really they are a mix of Metal, Industrial, Glam, Rock and Goth, which they mix up in different proportions from album to album, or even song to song. The sentence about it being hard to categorise the band due to having influences from many genres is good, but I believe the opening sentence should read "Marilyn Manson is a metal band". Despite softening up a bit on Eat Me, Drink Me, their most popular stuff is clearly metal, a style they retained for a long time. TheEmpiricalGuy 13:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Since there is obvious debate concerning MM's genre(s), I would think it is legitimate to keep the first sentence vague (genre-wise). Since metal is a subgenre of rock, it is better to say "is a rock band" in the first sentence because metal is included in rock, but rock is not included in metal. Simple as that. Zouavman Le Zouave 16:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Hang on, it's back up as Metal again. I thought everyone had come to the consensus that we were going with rock, but mentioning they had a metal influence. Although IMO they are, for the most part, a metal band, there are parts, especially on EMDM that are not metal at all. Just wanna be clear on what's going on here. Also, should there be gothic listed somewhere? I know this is a matter of strong contention for some people, but manson himself has used the term in places... I'm not saying it should the main genre, just that there should be mention they often incorporate a gothic mood, more than actual music. TheEmpiricalGuy (talk) 10:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

which retarded buttmonkey classified this as "heavy metal"??? fucking clueless wanker...

Nu metal

But doesn't Manson have some elements of nu metal in his music, because doesn't he have very few solos in his music, and elements of electronic instrumentation in his music. DavidJJJ 11:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, he's listed as alternative metal by most sources. Nu metal has rapping (see Korn, Limp Bizkit or Slipknot), which is absent in Manson's work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.217.37.15 (talk)

I'd just leave it with alternative metal - I think everyone can agree that it's a 'metal' sound, and not the traditional sound of bands like Metallica, Slayer, etc. The exact genre changes somewhat from album to album (GAoG was very much 'industrial metal'), but as a whole, alternative metal is the best, least controversial fit.

theyre not metal at allZakkman (talk) 10:33, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

dude the band isnt fucking nu metal.get that through your head.(Theshaz23 (talk) 06:52, 28 August 2010 (UTC))

Very constructive. --LordNecronus (talk) 12:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Alright, Manson is NOT Nu Metal, Nu Metal is a mix of Heavy Metal and Hip-Hop, and Rap, and not in a single song Manson Raps or anything like that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.203.22 (talk) 04:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson uses some elements that are common in nu metal such as sampling (but he doesn't use turntables), electronic/industrial background, spoken-word lines and non-singing screamings, that he used in some songs. Of course he used rapping or spoken-word linesnon-singing screamings in This is the New Shit or other songs For example, nu metal was descended from not only alternative and rap metal, but even fron industrial metal. --82.139.5.13 (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2012 (UTC) their more of an alt metal band then they are nu metal — Preceding unsigned comment added by I call the big one bitey (talk • contribs) 23:11, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

goth rock

Someone put goth rock back up. Come on, people I see this band listed next to other bands like KMFDM or whatever those letters are and rob zombie. Metal is metal, and goth rock is goth rock. They have a different path back from the eighties and further and have COMPLETELY different influences. I am taking it out.

On Eat Me, Drink Me there's a couple of gothish sounds, such as on that of "If I Was Your Vampire". The band's official MySpace also lists them as goth. "If I Was Your Vampire" is one of the only gothish songs on the album, other than that it's pretty much rock, most of it's upbeat rock too. R-Tiztik 20:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Although its still "unreleased" (you can't cite something intangible), and there are few sources on the album, I will argue that If I was your vampire is not the only goth sounding track (Goth cannot be characterized by lengthy crackling echoes only). The Band's myspace is a good source, but one could argue the summary for Marilyn Manson.com as "official website of heavy metal singer with the band of the same name". Marilyn Manson is a chameleon and it should be mentioned in the text (I believe it is already) and the genres should all be there, including "glam" "Industrial" "goth" "heavy metal" and "shock rock". styles that carry over albums are equally important.

Nope, not goth rock, sorry. I love EMDM, but nothing on that album is not goth, maybe dark alternative.

Manson is Heavy Metal(Antichrist Superstar), Glam(Mechanical Animals, Shock Rock(The High End of Low), and Industrial Metal in all of his albums, it should be INDUSTRIAL METAL, he was even produced by Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails, and NIN is nothing but Industrial, Industrial Metal is the common denominator on all of his albums. 22:20 January 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.203.22 (talk) 04:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Whoever keeps listing nu metal on manson's page please stop. Pinkzeppelin4 (talk) 02:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Practicing satanist???

Im not sure if this is where I go to ask such questions, but is there any information available regarding Marilyns having been made an official satanic priest by Anton Lavey and his embrace or disancing himself from it after Antons death? Also I have heard that he embraces the republican party but cant find any info to validate this. These are both facts I got off of a political chat room, so I cant verify them, although VH1 DID say that Marylin was given preisthood status by Mr Lavey, they dont speak as to if he is still a member. jake

Manson does say that he was made reverend by AL in his book. I haven't read it in a while, so I can't give more details... --Julien 03:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Manson was made a Reverend by Anton LaVey, but this is a title of respect from the Church of Satan, and can be bestowed upon those who are not members. Manson is not a member of the CoS, nor is he a Priest, he simply was a fan of Anton LaVey's philosophy. Furthermore, Manson never HAS been a member of the CoS. -- CABHAN TALK CONTRIBS 04:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

The above answer is incorrect. "Reverend" is a title which spans several ranks within the CoS, including Priest. Manson is an official member of the CoS, and bears the rank of Priest.

As for embracing the Republican party, he's made statements in the past that could be taken that way (he supported Bush for President in 2000, but that was largely because Al Gore's running mate was his arch-nemesis Joe Lieberman), plus... well... he's rich. He's also made more recent statements opposing the Bush administration, so his political views are fairly ambiguous. --keepsleeping quit your job! slack off! 04:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

thanks of the info to all who contributedPickelbarrel 21:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I was watching a documentary on Marilyn Manson and it claims that he has said publicly that he was Christian now. Is this true? TearAwayTheFunerealDress 16:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

If he did say that, it could be contributed to his sense of humour. Otherwise it would remove the point of his philosphies.... can you tell me what doco you were watching?

Possible fun

Something that I always found interesting, and seems to be a fairly popular myth is the "Marilyn Manson was the actor from the Wonder Years". Perhaps if someone feels up to it they can find a way to incorporate it.[6][7] Arkon 04:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

This is already in the article on Marilyn Manson the person (Brian Warner). This article is about the band. Mdhowe 08:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

"Absolutely fantastic". Is that objective?

Late influences have come from the absolutley fantastic literature and poetry of David Beckham, whose chameleon-like ability to shift from one style to another, replete with a new look and musical philosophy, was a characteristic which would also be frequently ascribed to Marilyn. --Bad carpet 17:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Not really, and I believe it should David Bowie not David Beckham.

That sounds more like the literal meaning of 'fantastic'. That is, surreal or whimsical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.248.0.86 (talk) 06:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Images

I have just looked throught the Marilyn Manson website and the content is great, however it is ruined by the many images which criss cross over the text, leaving boxes for images left blank while the image that is supposed to be in it sits across the other side of the screen. I am unsure of how to change the images and wont touch them incase it ruins it however this is all that is wrong with the page, once that is sorted it will work perfectly. --Slipdisk 21:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

The images appear okay in my browser (MSIE 6). It's likely the problem is with how your browser is rendering the page. --malber 21:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of images, is the photo of Marilyn Manson at the top of the article public domain? How does Wikipedia deal with image copyright issues? Thanks --mike

Marilyn Manson On The Internet - separate article?

Would it be worth creating a new article on Manson's website and the many updates as it looks like it will become irelevent here after a while and it's getting quite long. sorry i forgot to sign this --Jimmyjrg 10:22, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea, his website has always been pretty elaborate, Meomega15 23:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Although this is an original idea, I do not think that creating an article about Marilyn Manson's website would be a good idea. Maybe adding a couple of smaller sections to the Internet section could help expand the section in an orderly manner. Zouavman Le Zouave _{(Talk to me! • O))))} 06:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be appropriate to create an article entirely about the website (marilynmanson.com). Goldenglove^{Contribs ·Talk} 08:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Record Label

Manson is no longer on Nothing and hasn't been for a long time now. This needs to be changed. I don't even think Nothing exists anymore in any real form.

Still, he was on them for quite some time, so they deserve to be mentioned.

Nothing Records is a subsidiary of Interscope Records. When Nothing Records closed, Manson went onto the parent label Interscope. LuciferMorgan 18:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

spooky kids

Marilyn Manson and the Spooky Kids should be a separate article, White Zombie and Rob Zombie are separate. Though I guess White Zombie had more comercial success, MM & Spooky Kids were charachters of their neighbourhood etc. Cadmiumcandy 14:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I think this is something that should be done, since they've also released several albums under the Spooky Kids name (White Trash, etc) as well as several demo tapes FinalDeathwish 09:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

In his autobiography, Marilyn (the person) says they just shortened the name because no one was using the full one. Same band, shorter name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by To tough to die (talk • contribs) 19:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

White Trash was a Spooky Kids bootleg anyways. R-Tiztik 20:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

From what I know, Rob Zombie is a person/singer of fmr band White Zombie. Spooky kids were the same band(LHROH), songs by them that were not released as Marilyn Manson are still considered rarities/unreleased material. Now here's something tricky: Is "Lunchboxes and Choklit cows" a Manson album? It was remastered, released, and recorded by former member Scott Putesky and not by the current band. Perhaps a "compilation album" would suit it. These other "Several albums" are demos, not official releases.

You need to do your research more thoroughly. Rob Zombie left White Zombie in 1998 to start his solo career. Since that time, he has become more interested in the notion of having his supporting group manifest into a more permanent band, but continuing to use Rob Zombie as the title of the band as well as his own stage name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.248.0.86 (talk) 06:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

The Spooky Kids shoudnt be a new article, because its the same band, just shorter name, but it should have a better descripcion of their begginings(The Marilyn Manson & The Spooky Kids Era) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.203.22 (talk) 04:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Leno Appearance

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=60201 - The link has some info, though if you do a search on the site more info will be unearthed. LuciferMorgan 17:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson Tag

Should the Marilyn Manson tag, {{Marilyn Manson}} be applied to previous members pages as well?

Yes, it's what's generally done with any band Nightmare X 06:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Is Manson a drug user?

I know is seems a stupid question, with his lyrics obivisuly referring to drug use, but if he's so open about his drug using, why hasn't be been busted?

He has been in the past. LuciferMorgan 23:46, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, we all know he at least drinks absinthe at this point, I doubt he's given up drugs, or at least I haven't heard anything of it. As for not being 'busted', it's not like he does them in public, and besides, song lyrics have nothing to do with things like that. Narcotics faerie 01:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Ahem, "Great Big White World" was about cocaine mister :) R-Tiztik 15:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

It's called a warrant, which they did have at the time of his autobiography (mentioned by him in an interview) but he claims they found nothing. He mentions previous usage, but never current or future use. In recent years he's alluded to, but not admitted to using them, such as saying he has use for straws. When asked in 2006 by mansonusa.com about his supposed opium den he changed the subject to "making it to my house", referencing his dislike for stalkers and "hunting" them when on his property. Absinthe is illegal only with opium in it, the drink itself isnt. His "drug" lyrics are often metaphors for love, his love songs are often metaphors for drugs, Manson is hardly ever direct in his messages or goes into explicit details about the meaning of a song.

Early Years timeline error

i'm a bit confused. The timeline states that everything related to Portrait of an American Family took pllace in 1993, but that the tour in which Sarah Lee Lucus was "fired" (tee hee) was in March of 1995. The article skips a whole year. If I recall correctly, Portrait was released in 1994, so maybe the author(S) simply got confused and wrote the wrong year down? Also, I don't know if the tourmates are right; the opening tour for NIN also had them playing for Hole, which isn't documented, and I can't remember if the proceeding tour was in fact with Danzig and KoRn. (Did they even exist as a band in 1995? I thought they were touring with Monster Voodoo Machine for the Smells Like Children EP...) Finally, I disagree with the wording of the section related to Sarah being released from the band: the way it's written it seems that Manson and Lucas had personal tension between them when in fact all that happened was that the band replaced him with a better drummer and just didn't want to tell him until the tour was over, and the drum set being set on fire was due to an unrelated incident involving someone throwing a bottle onstage.--sfrog 03:35, 26 Nov 2006 (PST)

The album was released in 1994, but recorded in 1993. Also there was personal tension between Manson and Lucas - read Manson's autobiography. (PS - If you have, then I suggest you read it again) LuciferMorgan 00:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Infobox image

It skipped my mind that an infobox image has to be a free one. So if someone could find one of the whole band, that would be great. Stupid little things like infoboxes without images taint Featured Articles. -- Reaper X 22:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Citing books

When citing books, specific page numbers need to be cited on specific inline citations. This article currently does not do that. LuciferMorgan 13:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

sweet dreams link

The sweet dreams single link goes to the original eurythmics single.203.206.110.145 16:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The original single has info on the new cover. It seems to be standard for Wikipedia (when Green Day and U2 did their cover of "The Saints are Coming" no new article was made, it was just added to the original article for the Skids' version). to tough to die 21:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Marilyn Manson (musician) moved to Marilyn Manson. Note that I did take part in the discussion, but the results seem clear so there should be no conflict with my closing of the poll. Vegaswikian 00:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson (band) → Marilyn Manson — Marilyn Manson has been a redirect to Marilyn Manson (band) for six weeks now. Assuming that means everyone agrees that it's the most common usage, there's no need for the redirect anymore. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Note to closing admin. Please also consider Marilyn Manson (musician) → Marilyn Manson as a result. I support that alternate move equally to the original request and it appears several below support it more than the original. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Another note to closing admin: I added a move request section at Talk:Marilyn Manson (musician) with a suggestion that discussion stay here - but a vote has been added there too. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Survey - in support of the move

Survey - in opposition to the move

1. Oppose I think the person is more of a primarily topic then the Band, especially if you ask the average person on the street what they think of when you saw Marilyn Manson. I doubt that few would even be able to name another band member or album cover. It is the persona of Marilyn Manson that most will recognize and it really overwhelms the notability of the band by comparison. 205.157.110.11 02:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Oppose Marilyn Manson is the primary usage here without question. Vegaswikian 03:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Does that mean you want Marilyn Manson (musician) moved to Marilyn Manson? I'm good with that - as long as Marilyn Manson isn't redirecting because any X redirecting to X (d) is silly. —Wknight94 (talk) 03:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
     • I would support that as well. 205.157.110.11 03:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
     • Yes, move the person, Marilyn Manson (musician), to Marilyn Manson. Vegaswikian 19:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose. Move the singer to the non-disambig title as primary usage. God knows whenever you see Marilyn Manson in the news, they're talking about that one particular guy who wasn't in the Wonder Years. -- SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 05:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Oppose and move singer. I think there's support for that. Patstuart^talk|edits 09:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Oppose, like others here I would consider the singer to be the primary topic rather than the band. PC78 18:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Oppose, simply because it's fine the way it is now. -- Reaper X 03:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Oppose. More common usage is the person, not the band. --Bobblehead 05:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Quick suggestion: folks may want to clearly indicate their support of the alternate Marilyn Manson (musician) → Marilyn Manson move. Hopefully the closing admin will take that into consideration when they close. I like either move equally - as long as there's no silly redirect in the mix. I'll add a note at Marilyn Manson (musician). —Wknight94 (talk) 12:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Incontinuity

The date Tainted Love was released on this page and on the Tainted Love page are different (says here 2002, and 2001 on the other page)

IF it matters whoever reads this could find out which is right, or leave it if both are somehow.

Sorry if I didn't do something right... 64.184.139.58 06:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The "Tainted Love" single was released on March 18, 2002. R-Tiztik 15:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

A note on GA status

I see that this article was at one time a Featured article or FA candidate. However, the article is not listed as a Good Article . As part of the Rock music WikiProject, it is suggested that an article achieve Good Article (GA) status before having it's candidacy re-newed. So be sure that points from any previous Features article candidate (FAC) archives and peer reviews are taken and applied to the article, and shoot for a GA nomination. Good luck! -- Reaper X 22:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Celebritarian rising: the new era (2006–)

Someone please update Celebritarian rising: the new era (2006–) since this is extremely out of date such references such "icluding a new song to be called "Rebels Without Applause" User:Padaz 2:06, 8 March 2007 Australia times

In an interview with The Heirophant, Manson was asked what was happening with the Celebritarian movement. Manson is still a member of this "Celebritarianism", but his music isn't currently going in that direction as all references to the Cross of Lorraine (the symbol of Celebritarianism) have been removed from the Marilyn Manson website, the Eat Me, Drink Me record has no references to Celebritarianism by any level, and Marilyn Manson himself stated this. My point here is that the heading "Celebritarian rising" doesn't seem to reflect the band anywhere beyond 2006, and so shouldn't this heading title be changed? It seems like starting a heading for the post-Celebritarian era would just make two small sections in comparison to the history sections above the "Celebritarian rising: the new era (2006–)" heading, but given the massive change in direction, it just doesn't seem classifiable under the Celebritarian section. R-Tiztik 15:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Jennifer Zawaski

"He also takes much of his inspiration from the voluptuous Jennifer Zawaski." What does that even MEAN? Also it got no source. It was put here by: 19:20, 27 March 2007 Mza919 (Talk | contribs) (→Composition and songwriting) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.248.1.11 (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

Whoever posted that obviously has a soft spot for her. :)

URFG 16:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)URFG

Yeah whatever:). Now who is that and how is it related to the band? I did a short google and all it came up with was some bodybuilder. I think it should be removed and also please someone tell me what is going on there?

Ok, I will remove the Zawaski line. Fun while it lasted but serslywtf.

WTF

Alright who the hell added the album cover of Eat Me, Drink Me...seriously where the hell are your sources? or did you just shop it or something? because there is no mention of it on the official site... ItsNotLupus 11:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I have removed it and nominated it for deletion. Almost certainly a fake. J Milburn 18:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

kudos to you sir ItsNotLupus 11:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

hmmm...

'Mariolyn Manson is a truly intelligent person. Though many have critisized him as "Satanic" "Horrible" And "disturbing". None of these morons have gone so far to look into what they call obscene.' erm...written by a 12 year old? This is certainly not NPOV by any stretch and certainly poor writing. How embarrassing!

Lol...He even spelled his name wrong. Makes me wanna cry ;-;72.241.165.155 02:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

"the last name of a mass murderer or a serial killer"

Same thing isn't it? Also it must be noted, Manson has never named Alice Cooper as an influence.- Deathrocker 05:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Nope. A mass murderer might kill a group of people in the same event. A serial killer reaches their total by killing one or two people at a time in several events over a long period of time. -- Mikeblas 22:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted that Charles Manson is not a mass murderer or serial killer, rumored to have killed one person.

'them and their tapes to The Record Plant in Los Angeles, California where Manson peformed anal intercourse on goats and children before and after performing oral sex on himself'...excuse me?

Manson mentions Cooper as an influence in his book.

Where in his book does he mention him as an influence? He may have listened to his music, but does that warrant him as an influence? Not in my book LuciferMorgan 03:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Italic text"during a performance of the then-current single, "Lunchbox", he doused Lucas's drum kit in butane and set it ablaze — with Lucas still attempting to play on behind it.Italic text

I don't believe butane would have been used. Butane is a compressed gas. It would be somewhat difficult to set something like a drum set on fire with and impossible to "douse" something in it. It is more than likely that lighter fluid was used.

Fair use criteria

The use of images not in compliance with our fair-use criteria or our policy on nonfree content is not appropriate, and the images have been removed. Please do not restore them. — Κaiba 18:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

This is a bad bad bad article

Remove fan biased writings (The Hierophant and Nachtkabarett writers with no sense for perception of the casual reader.)

Replace every KMFDM with David Bowie ('rotating members'), as Marilyn Manson is not in the same universe as KMFDM, and as for Golden Age of Grotesque, clean that text. If 20 loud members on Hierophant, who think Manson should still perform Spooky Kids songs, think it's a bad album, that may not be true. Do by all means explain the sublimal depth of the album, but make it better.

Bring the old stories to 2007, keep only relevant ones, portay them as a part of a myth. Why are the stories still more important then fabulous depth Mr. Manson puts in everything he does (his marriage as an Celebritarian event), don't indulge.

Eat Me, Drink Me debuting number 2 on what chart? Billboard? Say it. Make it cleaner, clean the symbols, perfect the story, make it celebratory, so that people can eat and drink him.

you sound like a nutter! apologies for lack of manners but ...woop woop!

Removal of gothic rock

I do not care what an someone sees as "definitely gothic rock," that is a POV. Please see the discussion page on the album in question for a further explanation. Until than, I see more credible sources who write on gothic rock that exclude manson from gothic rock than ones that include. If you add it again, with the excuse that "it is definitely gothic rock" then I will report it as vandalism.

• Good faith edits cannot be reported as vandalism. Zazaban 08:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Name

A lot of the band members Wwikipedia pages use their real names instead of their stage names (Like Twiggy being on here as Jeordie White), so why not have Marilyn Manson's page (The person) be Brian Warner and have the band's page be just Marilyn Manson? I don't know how to change that or if it can be changed, but it seems like I should bring it up here.

Rock or Metal

Okay, either one or the other is used on MM articles across wikipedia, it's time we decieded which one is correct. Rock or Metal. I say it's defiantly Rock. Zazaban 23:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'd also say that the band's music is Rock rather than Metal. 162.40.164.81 00:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

then you're a complete dumbsshit.pardon my french,but manson's work crosses so many genres of rock AND meta that it would be incredibly appropriate to just list the band as alternative metal.listen to antichrist superstar.the majority of the song are hard hitting metal songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.163.3.228 (talk) 21:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

ACSS Might be somewhat metal, but his work crosses all genres, and to say Mechanical Animals is metal is ignorant beyond belief. KMFDM Fan (talk) 20:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC) --KMFDM Fan (talk) 20:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Genres

We really need to settle on 2 or 3. We can't have seven up there! Zazaban 20:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed... it may be helpful to list a couple genres in the main article. And, if appropriate, we could also note some of the varied genres within the articles of the respective album/era. Thanks. J. T. Lance 01:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Metal, Absolutely Metal, Rock is a lot Softer, and not only on the music, in the Lyrics and Image too, if anything rock-like it would be Shock Rock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.203.22 (talk) 04:34, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Image

I've switched the image in the top right from a logo to a free image of members of the band twice now, and I want to explain myself here (I accidentally hit enter before I finished my edit summary the last time) so that I don't have to do it again. I think that the image in the top right should be of the band or members of the band, especially because many free license images are readily available, rather than a logo, because of obvious reasons. I also think that, although a picture of the full band would be preferable, I think that an image of Marilyn Manson (the person) alone would be acceptable as well, as he is both the namesake of the band and the one consistent member (Other examples of the sole consistent member of a band being pictured can be seen at The Cure and Nine Inch Nails). --Brandt Luke Zorn 18:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Olivia Newton Bundy & Zsa Zsa Speck

A number of anons are very persistently deleting these people from both this article and the template with absolutely no explanation. What can be done about this? Zazaban 23:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's true, i put this people almost 5 times, and ever delete them, why? i don't know... Maul day 08:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

On Manson's AMG page, they're not listed as members. [8] But I don't know enough about the band's history to say if they were members, though. Funeral 19:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Their names on on a cassette from the band's early days. They were members. link Zazaban 20:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

They're also briefly mentioned in Manson's autobiography. LuciferMorgan (talk) 00:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

What happen to the Soundtracks contributions

It gone. What happen to it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.91.213 (talk) 20:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Twiggy's Back

Could someone atleast find the original bulletin and add it here? or add it to my talk page please? Thanx.Mutlee (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The message from the Goon Moon myspace page:

Thursday, January 10, 2008
beans have spilled

Jeordie is playing with manson again. Very exciting indeed.
DON'T WORRY, Goon Moon is still very much alive and still a band. You will be getting a full statement about all of this in the next few days.

Hope that helps?  Doktor  Wilhelm  14:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

gENRES

Just looking through page history, found a few quite plausable genres:

• Industrial metal
• Shock rock
• Experimental rock

What do you think? I'm not suggesting we put them up there in the infobox but maybe incorpate them into the article? Your thoughts please. Thanks for reading, ThunderMaster ^UTC 17:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Its Mostly Industrial Metal, on all the albums the genre changes but it still has Industrial Metal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.203.22 (talk) 04:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Big Black

What the Hell? Daisy didn't introduce Manson to Big black, it was Pogo...I'm changing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buckdich1 (talk • contribs) 08:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Chris Vrenna

He really left marilyn manson? he appear as a former member in the template, and in his page it's noted that he parted ways with MM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.180.154.180 (talk) 01:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Chris Vrenna has not left the band. If one reads the interview with Manson called Everyone Will Suffer Now on the Heirophant, he mentions that it is a misconception that Vrenna and Holliday are temporary members.Mattpaige (talk) 17:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Rob Holiday

He's left now? Anybody got a source for that one? Zazaban (talk) 20:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

You know, at the rate they're going I wouldn't be surprised if Manson left the band. :P Zazaban (talk) 21:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Rob Holliday has not left the band. If one reads the interview with Manson called Everyone Will Suffer Now on the Heirophant, he mentions that it is a misconception that Vrenna and Holliday are temporary members.Mattpaige (talk) 17:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

He has not returned to the band since Borland's departure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spartan9199 (talk • contribs) 03:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Awards

I just noticed that NIN had their own awards section is allMutlee (talk) 20:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

7th Album Details

'Manson’s seventh album planned for a late 2008 release!'

Where did a late 2008 release date come from? I see no news source, or information anywhere on a possible release date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.153.182 (talk) 17:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It's called speculation. It's gone now. Zazaban (talk) 02:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I just added a reference from Kerrang! that, yes, it is planned for a late 2008 release. See here: http://www2.kerrang.com/2008/05/manson_new_album_is_very_viole.html 76.113.43.129 (talk) 03:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Holly Ludke

This user seems to exist only to vandalize the genres of Marilyn Manson related articles (It is vandalism, he at one point changed it to country music.) I suggest some actions be taken. Zazaban (talk) 19:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Gothic Rock

Very quick question, just so we can direct people here if they ask. Is Manson gothic rock? I'd say no, although he may take some influence. Zazaban (talk) 01:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson isn't a goth band. The Allmusic entry on the genre even goes out of its way to mention that the band isn't goth, despite popular perception. For completeness' sake, in a Guitar World interview I have, both Manson and Twiggy mention Bauhaus as an influence, but Manson says Ziggy Stardust/Diamond Dogs-era David Bowie was always a bigger influence on the band. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Lovely, now I can send the people who add gothic rock to the talk page. Thanks :) Zazaban (talk) 03:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

• Okay, there is INFLUENCE from gothic rock. Saying there is influence is not the same as saying it is. Also, 'gothic darkness' exists as a term beyond referring to the goth subculture, so don't just wipe every instance of the word 'gothic' Zazaban (talk) 21:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Manson isnt goth, Type o Negative, HIM, those really are goth, if you listen to them and then to Marilyn, Manson isnt nything like gothic. Hellspriest (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I hope you're kidding. Type O Negative and HIM aren't goth at all. Not even close. Goth consists of bands like Bauhaus, Siouxsie and the Banshees, Sisters of Mercy, etc. HIM and Type O Negative are mallcore metal bands. 70.181.247.170 (talk) 20:07, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson ? Hard Rock, Heavy Metal ?

Marilyn Manson is not a band of Hard Rock/Heavy Métal ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabien Duboc (talk • contribs) 22:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I have everything the band has done, and none of it is heavy metal. Golden Age of Grotesque is closest, and even that isn't in there. It has heavy sounding guitars, that's not enough. Heavy metal has many other characteristics it doesn't meet: plenty of solos, technical playing (to a degree at least), high emphasis on and presence within the song of riffs. Overall it just doesn't make the cut. Unfortunately, because there are some sources (e.g. allmusic) that call the band metal, and a number of listeners who don't really understand what heavy metal is and will persist in keeping it on this page, there's little can be done about it. Such sources are totally unreliable, but because they're published or big they -technically- count and so the rules lawyers here won't let it be removed. Prophaniti (talk) 15:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

metal does not need technical guitar playing and/or solos.or pretty much anything else you said.take nu metal for example. you say that you have everything theyve done.are you saying the stuff on antichrist superstar isnt metal? if you are then it is YOU my friend who dont know what metal is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.163.3.228 (talk) 21:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

perhaps you do, 'Nu Metal' is not like other Metal. Thats why so many people do not consider Nu Metal to be Metal at all. It is a fusion genre of a number of heavy rock genres along with hip hop on occasions. I'm not the biggest Marolin Manson fan but from what I've heard perhaps Industrial Rock and Nu Metal best describe it (maybe Alternative as well). Leaving the genre simply as Rock perhaps isn't a good idea. It didn't work on the 'Indestructible' (Disturbed album) page or on the System of a Down page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.148.53 (talk) 05:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

No. Marilyn Manson is NOT nu metal. There's a few industrial-tinged tracks, but even that's rooted in rock. Marilyn Manson is varied, with the roots being ROCK, so ROCK is how it will stay. Robert Berkshire (talk) 02:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

By that logic you can put any band that plays any rock or metal sub genre under ROCK. Plain rock is more like The Rolling Stones or The Beatles (which sounds nothing like Marilyn Manson). Industrial or Alternative Rock at least... Nu Metal is a lost cause cause people see it as derogitory so I'll leave it. But, Marylin Manson is not just ROCK —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duck610 (talk • contribs) 05:29, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, actually, you could put any band that plays and rock or metal sub genre under rock. Both Industrial Metal and Alternative Rock are forms of Rock music. Nobody can agree on anything more specific, and it's still correct. Zazaban (talk) 05:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, why then don't we put every band that plays any form of rock or metal under rock? It's simple, it's too broad. And its mostly used in the info box on wikipedia for straight out Rock bands (examples above). Marylin Manson Doesnt play straight out Rock.

People can agree on more specific labels on most other articles. Nobody can agree on anything more specific here. Before the current setup, there was constant edit warring. Zazaban (talk) 20:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Image

Could somebody add a caption of when the picture's from and who's in it from left to right? I would, but I'm not sure who's who. Zazaban (talk) 05:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Valentines Day Release?

For the seventh studio album I don't think that MM stated that he hoped for a Valentines Day release. In the article that is cited, that statement is said by the writer of the article and I really think that the writer himself said that jokingly because of MM saying all that stuff about Twiggy being shit on alot by women and whatever. I don't think Manson himself ever mentioned anything about a Valentine's release. If you follow me.99.246.244.88 (talk) 05:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Genre of Marilyn Manson

--יוני לוי (talk) 01:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I do not understand why this record Marilyn Manson rock band Marilyn Manson is a metal band, especially Alternative metal. Alternative mean that he should not be just metal This alternative style that includes a lot of styles such as Alternative rock, Hard rock, Heavy metal, Progressive metal, Hardcore punk So this style is best for the show Marilyn Manson In addition, most of the songs Marilyn Manson style Industrial metal playlist that there is Industrial But this Alternative metal style has more style, so it should be first allmusic and rhapsody says to band is a styles Alternative Metal, Industrial metal.

Metal, alternative, alternative metal, industrial, emo, progressive, punk, hard rock, emo, deathmetal ... it's all related to rock 'n roll, and it is all rock music. It might be a metal band or any of those subgenres, but it's still totally accurate to describe Marilyn Manson's music as rock. -Synchronism (talk) 22:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Not really rock this is not her style metal band that metal. And most music sounds are sounds Industrial. There is no rock Maybe Matt songs that rock, but in this metal band took 4 sources prove this band Alternative metal band. --יוני לוי (talk) 22:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Why is it not rock? Metal is a type of rock. Alternative is also rock. Rock music (<--read this article) is a very broad term. It's used in the first sentence because his band's music is not consistently described as any one style or genre. Synchronism (talk) 23:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

--יוני לוי (talk) 00:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

hy not come to any artists called metal rock that rock and metal that Let's start from Metallica Come on this band without a Steota Provide Alternative Metal I'm waiting for Sategido How Look here 4 marilyn manson evidence that this Alternative Metal ^ http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll ^ http://mp3.rhapsody.com/marilynmanson ^ http://www.musicmademe.com/artist/424 ^ http://www.mp3.com/artist/marilyn-manson/summary/

Marilyn Manson is a Rock band. Most forms of Metal are also rock. What does Metallica have to do with this? I find it very difficult to understand your english. Zazaban (talk) 02:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

--יוני לוי (talk) 14:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC) I propose to change the style of Marilyn Manson I currently have 4 sites to authenticate what I was saying that Marilyn Manson is Alternative metal And who said that Marilyn Manson is rock there is no verification So they may come to verifying that Marilyn Manson is a rock band should be registered as Marilyn Manson is Alternative metal band

Note: Who wrote the English that is hard to understand my This is because I understand Hebrew and translates it into English on Google

Metal is a form of Rock. If something is Metal it is also by definition Rock. So to verify that Manson is Metal is to verify that he is Rock. Also, if you don't understand English it may not be the best idea to be editing on the English language wikipedia. There is, however, a Hebrew language wikipedia. Just a suggestion. Zazaban (talk) 23:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

יוני לוי (talk) 00:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC) I understand a little English but to write sentences, whole Sibiano them I use Google's translation of text

Connection to Marilyn Manson offers I get that a vote whether to register page of Marilyn Manson Alternative metal or rock

Prophaniti Let's do some voting style band According to my version, or your

--יוני לוי (talk) 04:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

1)http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marilyn_Manson_(band)&oldid=261026577

2)http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marilyn_Manson_(band)&oldid=260852917

And yet again, I'd advise against editing a website that you need to use an online translator to fully understand/edit. I don't know what your first language is, but I'm sure there is a wikipedia in that language. I'd respectfully recommend editing there.

And also yet again, three of those sources are not reliable ones. They count for nothing, please stop re-adding them. The other is thus left much outweighed. Prophaniti (talk) 19:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Synchronism you pass the laws, Styles should not delete and change the order --יוני לוי (talk) 22:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

There should be no doubt that Marilyn Manson is Industrial Metal, or perhaps Hard Rock, Nu Metal, or Alternative Metal. Leaving it as rock fails to meet Manson's contributions to the genre of Industrial and puts him in with every single rock musician which fails to classify him. Papersith (talk) 01:18, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

what the hell...

why is alternative metal out of the genre box? now i'm gonna wait about arguing about nu metal etc. until we already have things that we know to be true in the genre box. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.163.3.228 (talk) 21:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Prophaniti does what comes him

Prophaniti You don't have reason to erase the style alternative metal after brought sources is this violation on the laws

--יוני לוי (talk) 23:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems to appear that Wes Borland has left the band Marilyn Manson to rejoin Limp Bizkit once again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.175.138.203 (talk) 14:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

It's being taken out due to source weight: Manson has many different genres assigned to him, and to include all of them in the infobox would just clutter it. They are better kept to the body of the article itself, with the infobox only including those genres that are best sourced. Alas, the above user cannot speak English very well (as his above comments illustrate) and so doesn't seem able to understand this point. My repeated attempts to explain this and discuss have just been met with a continual flow of bad English saying "you can't do that" (e.g. "tou don't have reason to erase the style alternative metal after brought sources is this violation on the laws"). This whole thing just illustrates how lack of understanding of the language makes discussion impossible. Prophaniti (talk) 12:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Let's also clear up the issue of these sources being added, shall we?

• Musicmademe - This appears to be user-submitted, certainly I can't see anything that suggests it has actual staff working on these genres.
• MP3.com - This is a site dedicated to selling the music: it's no more reliable than amazon.
• Rhapsody - Another sale site.
• MSN - This just uses a direct paste of allmusic's overview.
• AOL - Again, just uses allmusic, which we already have in there.
• Yahoo - The genres have no author attributed to them, so again, we can't tell who put them in or where they come from.

For these reasons, none of the above sources are reliable ones on the band's genre. If anyone truly thinks they are, ask about it at the reliable sources noticeboard. Unless there's something from there affirming that they are reliable sources, I'll simply continue to remove them. Sources like allmusic, IGN music, Rolling Stone, NME and so on we use because they are published and/or have an editorial and staff body, and musicmight because it's the site of Garry Sharpe-Young, a respected and published expert on rock and metal music. Prophaniti (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I downloaded the sources that the user Prophaniti said that they are not proper --יוני לוי (talk) 01:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't make grammatical sense. Zazaban (talk) 02:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Precisely so. Indeed, it doesn't make any sense at all. Prophaniti (talk) 09:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Styles should not delete and change the order of their conceivable yourself without proof \ sources --יוני לוי (talk) 22:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

We've given very good reasons why we're reverting you, although I'm under the impression you cannot understand what we're saying. I have come to the conclusion that you are either purposely trying to cause annoyance, or you are Twoflower. Which is it? Zazaban (talk) 01:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

You do not have any reason to do this change you made

I gave proof to the styles to I Networking --79.179.110.34 (talk) 21:16, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Every reply just makes it more and more obvious that you either don't actually understand what's being said, or at the least are not able to reply properly. Either way, please stop making such edits. Reasoning has been given. If you can't understand it or won't accept it, then I'm afraid that's your problem. I'm perfectly open to some good, coherent responses challenging these edits. Until those appear, it's not going to go anywhere. Prophaniti (talk) 22:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I know in the music and you are impress Crap I have proof \ sources And have no evidence / sources So stop explain, in English Stories --יוני לוי (talk) 01:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Even for these styles, there is no agreement, the sources that I use are also other values in Wikipedia --יוני לוי (talk) 01:37, 13 February 2009 (UTC)::

What exactly did you just type and what do you mean by it. All your statements are gibberish and provide no argument for your ongoing edit war. By previous consensus, when there is conflict over genre content, allmusic is not to be used as it has been declared non-reliable as a source for genres on Wikipedia. Please do not continue posting incoherent babble. Peter Fleet (talk) 01:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Rob Holliday

Can someone please cite a source backing up the fact that Rob is back in the band? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.185.87.88 (talk) 00:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

References?

So, I've spent some time looking through the Manson articles, and one of the things I keep noticing is a lack of information on outer sources. I'm not just talking about citations, which there are usually only 2 of. No, I mean references to things like the bible, and art. Example: The usage of metal teeth as a reference to visions of the Apocalypse in the bible. Would it be worth adding information about inspiration? If not, why?Robert Berkshire (talk) 17:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Differentiation from the man

I was just wondering why their are separate articles for the Marilyn Manson band and the man himself. It seems odd seeing as most solo musicians would just be spoken about on their page. I would have thought there'd be some kind of rule on this, so I am just wondering... how did this article get around it? I would love to make an article for an Ozzy Osbourne band instead of just leaving it all to his solo page. Andre666 (talk) 13:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

MarilynManson.com merger

Against-- I feel the article for Marilynmanson.com is a little to big to be merged into Marilyn Manson (band). --The Angriest Gamer you've Ever Heard 16:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Against - too big, and it merits its own article. Dark Prime (talk) 21:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Heavy Metal

shouldn't Marilyn Manson be classified as Heavy Metal? That's how allMusic classified them. MetalMagnet1987 (talk) 02:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Not really. Genre's are either misappropriated or too specific. I'm opposed to using genre's. However, Marilyn Manson's set of genre's changes with every album. "Heavy metal" would be Antichrist Superstar, I think. But is Mechanical Animals heavy metal? No. Robert Berkshire (talk) 03:07, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I am actually listening to Mechanical Animals now. It is absolutely Industrial Metal, Industrial Rock, or Nu Metal. Papersith (talk) 01:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Semi-Protection Proposal

I would like to propose that this article be semi-protected due to the risk of vandilism. (marilyn manson is a big target for 12 year old trolls) The Most Angry Pissed off Gaming Nerd 23:08, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry IP users, but I was able to get it semi-protected. KMFDM FAN (talk) 21:12, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

He's no doubt Industiral

What's the one common genre pretty much everyone (including manson) defines Manson as? Industrial Rock. --The Most Angry Pissed off Gaming Nerd 00:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Saying you are French does not make you so./isshot My point being, of course, that what Manson says he is doesn't make him so. Someone, preferably a professional musician, should examine the possible genre's. I think, though, that the band should just be listed as "Rock," considering that it's the only thing the different albums really have in common. Robert Berkshire (talk) 19:17, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I do not see Marilyn Manson as anything but Industrial Metal, Industrial Rock, and perhaps Hard Rock. By no means should it be left as rock, for it is very different than many rock bands. Papersith (talk) 01:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Manson has been many genres, but Rock isnt one of them, all of his albums have Industrial Metal, along with other genre but still Metal, not Rock or Goth. Hellspriest (talk) 01:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

It's simply Alternative Rock/Metal. How could it be Industrial Metal? The band don't use much distorted vocals or any samplers or sequencers, which is a stylistic characteristic of Industrial Rock/Metal. They don't even use a drum computer! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.134.0.116 (talk) 08:11, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Onward or Present?

I'm getting tired of this. It seems to show up every other day. Tell me- are we going to stick with "onward" or "present" with the band member lengths? Let's end this edit war soon, or I'll start busting heads. Robert Berkshire (talk) 23:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

People are arguing about two words? FAIL! I think we should use the term present. But this is really an edit war? *facepalm* KMFDM FAN (talk) 22:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Neither is appropriate. Per WP:DATE#ODR: "The form since 1996 should be used in favor of 1996–present in article text and infoboxes." I will continue to revert edits to the contrary (i.e. 1989–present) as it is a violation of Wikipedia standards. DKqwerty (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

What? I could have sworn I read the page on it a few hours ago, and it said "onward" was the correct term. o_O Robert Berkshire (talk) 18:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

You're right regarding the usage from 1989 onward; however, people keep changing it to 1989–onward and this is incorrect. I would prefer using Since 1989 since it's short and concise, which is (in my opinion) better for list-style data; From 1989 onward would be (again, in my opinion) better for inline usage. DKqwerty (talk) 19:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Genre!

Look at Marilyn Manson (person). All his genres are provided with cite notes. I think we should put those ones on this article. KMFDM FAN (talk) 23:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Alternative Pop/Rock?

I saw the Mechanical Animals album article and Alternative Pop/Rock is listed. Through the history of the group, I don't hear any pop/rock sound in any of the albums. Unless there's proof, it needs to be taken out.65.34.252.251 (talk) 17:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

The "proof" is in the cited reference. It doesn't matter what you or anyone else "hears" because Wikipedia does not allow original research. All Music Guide (aka Allmusic) is a proven, reliable source and unless you can find a valid and reliable source which contradicts the information it provides, the genres must be left alone.

And this discussion belongs on the Mechanical Animals talk page, not the Marilyn Manson talk page. DKqwerty (talk) 17:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

New Full time Member?? 0_o

Andy Gerold? Who is this guy? And if he's a "new member" why is there no mention of him in the article? KMFDM FAN ^(talk!) 17:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC) KMFDM FAN ^(talk!) 17:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably because he was mentioned on MansonWiki. Curiously, there was no sauce (source) there, either. Robert Berkshire (talk) 18:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Kill it until there's something more substantial. Zazaban (talk) 01:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Chew on these: com.au/Marilyn-Manson-tickets/artist/766825?tm_link=tm_homeA_k3 [9] [10] [11]. I'll leave you all to mull over the reliability of these articles, but there's little reason to doubt the veracity at the very least. I just don't care about this band anymore since Holy Wood was their last great album. DKqwerty (talk) 02:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I have a question about Images.

http://www.spookykids.net Here's the scoop. This website contains info about Marilyn Manson and The Spooky Kids. Now. Here's my question. This website has images of old marilyn manson members (such as gidget gein and zsa zsa speck.) Now these images were donated by fans of the spooky kids. So would they be safe to use on this website since they we're donated to a non-profit website to be used for informal purposes only? I ask becuase I want to provide images for the older members. KMFDM FAN ^(talk!) 22:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Heavy Metal

He is metal and im putting it on there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaronallknowingone (talk • contribs) 23:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Manson Covers section

Why would we not include "unofficial" covers? Marilyn Manson has a passion for covers. Obviously the Charles Manson cover is official, but it doesn't have a true source. Just the same as I can pull up Manson's Beatles cover or him singing "Eye" through Grooveshark.com... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artsupplymannequin (talk • contribs) 20:32, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

New picture.

The picture seems to not be appearing. Someone upload one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.181.9 (talk) 13:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Links to Heirophant interview

I have removed the link to the interview on mansonusa.com and replaced it with the version on MansonWiki.com. I know this is rather debatable, MansonWiki being a wiki (and mine at that), but it's the only current source of this interview. The Heirophant (MansonUSA) has been defunct for over 15 months now and it will not come back. The archived interviews on MansonWiki are all protected and can't be edited anymore, so the 'wiki is not reliable' argument is not really valid here I'd say. Feel free to remove it if you think that's appropriate, but reverting the link to MansonUSA once again is fruitless. Litso (talk) 12:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

That's unfortunate, I liked that site.Kornflakes89 (talk) 05:15, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Cleaning up the article..

There are so many unreferenced/citation needed/original research tags on this article. Can anyone help locate the proper citations or are Marilyn Manson fans really that lazy? Because, honestly, it makes the page look like shit. I've already located a few but I can't do it all. Next time, please include the proper references as you edit and add information on the page.

Take what I've done to the Holy Wood (In The Shadow Of The Valley Of Death) article as an example. It is solidly referenced. -Red marquis (talk) 15:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Even though every other fan hates me for leaking the Antichrist Superstar video, I'll help you out since I love Manson still. Where should I begin?--Mutlee (talk) 01:15, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

To be honest I don't know where to start. The introductory paragraph, perhaps? It's annoying how so many new young Manson fans come here and add their little tidbit of info without regard to citation, spelling or grammar. I just removed a vandalism on the page. To think this used to be a featured article that saw placement on the front page. By the way, I apologize for the lateness of my reply. I've been so busy on getting Holy Wood up to snuff for GA and, eventually, FA status that I completely forgot about this. ps. How about creating a Wikiproject Industrial taskforce for Marilyn Manson? Their articles are all in poor shape. -Red marquis (talk) 17:27, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Brian Tutunick

There is only one minor mention of Tutunick early in the article. Based on that it would seem that he was only a bit player in the history of MM, which may well be. For clarity, mention should be made, somewhere along the line, as to when and why he left the band. Also, he should obviously be included in the list of former members of the band toward the end of the article. One more thing, on his own page/article, he is referred to as a co-founder of MM. If so, he should be given credit here. If not, someone (a fan) should clarify. Thanks Buster Seven Talk 18:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Add to industrial rock category

I think Marilyn Manson should be added to the industrial rock category, since the band is already listed in the industrial metal category as well as the American rock groups category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaxwes (talk • contribs) 23:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Labeling Manson as "metal" shows musical ignorance

While Marilyn Manson's music has often featured distorted electric guitars and shouted vocals, these elements do not justify the first sentence of this article claiming that they are an American "metal" band. To qualify as metal, there would need to be additional elements such as strong use of double bass drumming, songs with faster tempos, longer and more frequent guitar solos, and elaborate lead guitar work. Instead, Manson's tendencies toward synthesizers and electronic elements, as well as guitar work that is less abrasive than what is typically defined as metal, would place them in the "industrial rock" and "alternative rock" categories, because it is clear that heavy metal plays a very small part in their influences. Whoever wrote that they are a "metal" band has clearly not listened to the majority of their music, and seems to have little understanding of what makes a band metal beyond distorted guitars and aggressive vocals. 65.65.208.28 (talk) 19:16, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I think call'em alternative metal is way more apropiated, their albums and music usually mixes both styles rock + metal = alternative metal, this way everybody is happy. Nicrorus (talk) 05:37, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Change of photo on this article

The main photo of this article shows Marilyn Manson and a slight showing of the drummer. The article is of the band itself, not of the individual. Requesting to have the photo changed to reflect the current, or most current band lineup as I have no clue how to do said action 142.176.13.22 (talk) 04:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Changed to the most recent lineup. Ls883 (talk) 10:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson is death metal or black metal also?

For example, his vocals are similar to death/black metalists and even in music videos he is strongly make-uped to black and white, and due to nature of his songs --82.139.5.13 (talk) 18:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Indeed he is. He is after all set to headline the Nuclear War Now! fest in Berlin in November along with Alice Cooper and KISS, also qualified by their makeup. Dark Prime (talk) 18:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Personally speaking i don't think that he is Black or Death metal because his look, he is alternative metal at best. However if there is a source calling him black/Death metal it can go. Nicrorus (talk) 03:26, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson is neither death, nor black metal artist. By no means, IMHO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigsoft (talk • contribs) 15:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

If Marilyn Manson is nu metal or not

Marilyn Manson uses some elements that are common in nu metal such as sampling (but he doesn't use turntables, but rather from medias or PC's), electronic/industrial background, spoken-word lines and non-singing screamings, that he used in some songs. Of course he used rapping or spoken-word lines or non-singing screamings in This is the New Shit or other songs --82.139.5.13 (talk) 09:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Music samples

15 music samples would appear to be overuse - no other article on any band has so many non-free samples (even The Beatles only has half this number). WP:NFC clearly says "Music clips may be used to identify a musical style, group, or iconic piece of music when accompanied by appropriate sourced commentary". In this article they appear to be merely thrown in at random into each album section, and few have sourced commentary as to why they are defining a style or are iconic. Which samples could usefully be removed? Black Kite (talk) 11:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Red Marquis clearly went overboard uploading clips to far too many songs. Aside from the 14/15 listed on the main article – which, bar Personal Jesus, are all random album tracks and far from indicative of generally what's to be found on albums – there were also clips uploaded for the articles of every single, music video, and almost every promotional item ever released by the band. There's a clip for the promo-only single Astonishing Panorama of the Endtimes, a clip for the song Cryptorchid which wasn't even released as a promo single, it was just a random music video, We're from America, sAINT, Man That You Fear, the list goes all. I'd suggest submitting almost all of them for deletion, bar Sweet Dreams, The Beautiful People and The Dope Show, their three big singles Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:13, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

• "Beautiful People" and "Dope Show" weren't included; I've left "Sweet Dreams" and "Mobscene" in; adding the other two would be reasonable. Black Kite (talk) 01:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Done. Homeostasis07 (talk) 02:42, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

according to allmusic article, marilyn manson is nu metal

http://www.allmusic.com/explore/style/d2697 --82.139.5.13 (talk) 17:50, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

The Interscope Years

There seems to be a problem in the section The Golden Age of Grotesque. Lest We Forget was realesed under the label Interscoper only and not Nothing, you can see that even in the Lest We Forget CD, the only label that appears is Interscope.

In 2004 (before the realese of Lest We Forget), Nothing Records disbanded so when Manson realesed Lest, it was only by the label Interscope. So it should be included in the section "The Interscope Years", beign The Golden Age of Grotesque the last realese by Nothing Records & Interscope together.--Fallengrademan (talk) 15:22, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Heavy metal classification

It says the band is heavy metal when the source is Allmusic. Allmusic is not a reliable source when it comes to genres (they say the Red Hot Chili Peppers are heavy metal). I think we should have this removed. Yes, I do think they are a metal band, but they fit better in a sub-genre. If you are against this, please feel free to reply. --24.107.207.98 (talk) 21:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

John 5

There is a line in the section where it says John 5 left the band.

Though John 5 denied any hostility towards Marilyn Manson following the announcement of his departure, at the band's appearance on the Rock am Ring music festival in 2003 an incident took place between John 5 and Marilyn Manson where Manson kicked and then shoved the guitarist. John 5 responded with anger, throwing off his guitar mid-song and raising his fists to Manson, before resuming the song.

This is ridiculous. You are bringing up and citing an incident that happened many years earlier as a reason there "might" be some hostility now. Zdawg1029 (talk) 18:04, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Marilyn Manson (band). 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 https://web.archive.org/20101112003924/http://abcnews.go.com:80/Entertainment/wireStory?id=12084149 to http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=12084149
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131110085403/http://www.marilynmanson.com/news/index.html to http://www.marilynmanson.com/news/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150407145940/http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/01/18/marilyn-manson-bringing-twiggy-songs-satan-one-giant-evil-cocktail-on-tour to http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/01/18/marilyn-manson-bringing-twiggy-songs-satan-one-giant-evil-cocktail-on-tour/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150208135841/http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/01/11/marilyn-manson-says-led-zeppelin-is-responsible-reunion-with-twiggy to http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/01/11/marilyn-manson-says-led-zeppelin-is-responsible-reunion-with-twiggy/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131204051530/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071011/ap_on_re_us/school_shooting to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071011/ap_on_re_us/school_shooting

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Length problems

This article is freaking huge. 212k. Ouch. The article shouldn't be this long. It would fail GA criterion 3b pretty badly right now, I'm sure. Just a notification for anyone who's involved with the article that its GA review is going to take a beating for this. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 19:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marilyn Manson (band). 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/20160415014933/http://www.nme.com/news/marilyn-manson/7743 to http://www.nme.com/news/marilyn-manson/7743
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120119100905/http://www.nme.com/news/nme/1434 to http://www.nme.com/news/nme/1434

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) 11:43, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Marilyn Manson (band). 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/20161008154358/http://www.blistering.com/concertdet.php3?rid=91 to http://www.blistering.com/concertdet.php3?rid=91
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141221040642/http://www.undercover.fm/news/8407-marilyn-manson-returns-to-australia to http://www.undercover.fm/news/8407-marilyn-manson-returns-to-australia
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160803210620/http://www.wqlz.com/2015/01/08/marilyn-manson-releases-3rd-new-song-cupid-carries-a-gun/ to http://www.wqlz.com/2015/01/08/marilyn-manson-releases-3rd-new-song-cupid-carries-a-gun/

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) 19:01, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

2wo should be in associated acts

Apparently, someone edited out 2wo from the "Associated Acts" section, despite former guitarist John 5 (John Lowery) being in 2wo and Marilyn Manson. A Carbon Based Life Form (talk) 21:30, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I've been editing Wikipedia for a decade, and even I'm not all that sure on what constitutes an "associated" act. Every user seems to have different criteria on deciding what should be included. Personally, I'm not all that convinced that 2wo should be included. Sure, John 5 quit Rob Halford's 2wo to join Marilyn Manson, but Mark Chaussee was also a member of Halford's previous band Fight, and went on to perform guitar on the Against All Gods Tour. I'm not sure that's enough to include 2wo on this article, though, since every other band/act has multiple different tours and/or collaborations to tie them to Marilyn Manson. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:00, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

One thing (I don't think it's the only thing, but that's the way it's been with Slipknot) that would constitute an associated act would be if two or more members of the band in question were involved in this band. Have two MM members been in 2wo? 2607:FCC8:9E83:F900:C036:C00:4AE9:5ADD (talk) 04:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marilyn Manson (band). 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/20160610143528/https://www.guitar.com/articles/john-5-marilyn-mansons-dirty-little-secret to https://www.guitar.com/articles/john-5-marilyn-mansons-dirty-little-secret
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141210135919/http://pitchfork.com/news/57548-lana-del-rey-in-sexual-assault-scene-in-unreleased-marilyn-manson-video-directed-by-eli-roth/ to http://pitchfork.com/news/57548-lana-del-rey-in-sexual-assault-scene-in-unreleased-marilyn-manson-video-directed-by-eli-roth/

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) 09:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marilyn Manson (band). 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/20160815214040/http://www.kerrang.com/29041/50-greatest-rockstars-world-2015/ to http://www.kerrang.com/29041/50-greatest-rockstars-world-2015/

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) 22:39, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Marilyn Manson (band)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 17:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

A couple of initial comments:

• There's one deadlink, footnote 342: this now leads to a recipe page.
• There's also a harv error on Baddeley in the "Further reading" section; you can see harv errors by installing this script.
• The article is very long. I'm aware that they have a long history, but per WP:SUMMARY, I think we should consider letting some of the detail be discussed in the subsidiary articles. I don't have any particular suggestions for cuts to make, but may comment as I read through if I spot anything that doesn't seem necessary at the higher level article.

I'll go through and do a detailed review, but wanted to post these notes here first. |Mike Christie contribs - library) 17:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: To address your first concern, ref 342 leads to an article about Gary Numan; you must be referring to a different ref. To address your final concern, I would encourage you to read the (featured) articles for Lady Gaga and Katy Perry. Both of these articles are considerably more detailed than the article for Marilyn Manson, and those singers became part of the music industry at least a dozen years after the formation of Marilyn Manson.--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

It's 356, not 342; I hadn't realized that the Checklinks tool doesn't always preserve numbering. Re the length, I'm not necessarily going to suggest any cuts at all, but I do think it's something that should be considered when an article gets this long. As far as text is concerned, the Lady Gaga article is 6,975 words of prose; Katy Perry is 7,268 words, and this article is 9,717 words, so it's quite a bit longer than either of those. (I use this script for page size.) Any cut material doesn't have to be lost -- it can go in a subarticle. Anyway, let's wait and see; I may not find anything I think is worth cutting when I read through. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: I fixed the ref 356 problem; I found an archived version of the article.--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll copyedit as I go; please revert if I make a mess of anything.

• Everything in the lead should be in the article too, so can we mention "the name of each member was created by combining the first name of an iconic female sex symbol and the last name of an iconic serial killer" in the history section? It's referred to later in the article, but it would be sensible to include it at the point where the names are first chosen.
• That December, he met Scott Putesky, who proposed that the two form a band together after reading some lyrics and poems written by the singer: needs a bit of rewording; we haven't said Warner is the singer for the proposed band yet.
• who bestowed Manson with the title: this is an odd use of "bestowed"; one normally bestows X on Y, not Y with X.
• which would prove to be their first legitimate hit: suggest cutting "legitimate".
• and made a fairly major impact on the alternative rock charts: vague; I think you could cut the whole clause, but if not, can we be more specific?
• It was also confirmed that Antichrist Superstar would be the first installment in a concept album trilogy, and that the release of a follow-up was imminent, with both The Smashing Pumpkins frontman Billy Corgan and The Dust Brothers rumored to be involved in the production of the as-yet-untitled album: this looks cuttable to me; information about what was predicted as the next release back then is not really critical for the summary article. That would require a little rewording at the start of the next section to explain "triptych".

  You've cut this, but I think we need a bit more either in the next paragraph or somewhere in this section. If we can say when it became clear that the three albums were conceptually connected, let's do that; if it's not clear when that moment is, I'd put the information in under Antichrist Superstar, but without the "prediction" language. Perhaps "The band considered Antichrist Superstar, along with the next two albums, to form a conceptual trilogy", and if possible give a definition of the concept in their minds. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:15, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

• Immediately prior to this, Lowery had been a member of former Judas Priest vocalist Rob Halford's 2wo, who were themselves signed to Nothing Records: Do we need this? Just say "guitarist John Lowery of 2wo" in the previous sentence.
• I don't follow the sequence of events relating to the 2001 Ozzfest. Why did they refuse to take part? And if they weren't going to take part, why did religious groups protest?
• Not a big deal, but if you are looking for things to trim, exact details of releases aren't that critical to this level of narrative. For example, we don't really need to know that Guns, God and Government - Live in LA was released on November 17 -- the year is good enough -- nor that it was released on Blu-ray.
• Suggest cutting the deals of the fight with John 5 in 2003; again this should be in the subsidiary articles. If you keep it, I'd move it up to the start of that paragraph, so it doesn't read as a flashback.
• longtime keyboardist Madonna Wayne (Pogo) Gacy: I assume "Pogo" is a nickname, but this the only time it's mentioned. If it's relevant, explain it earlier, otherwise cut it.
• with a remix of the track by Yeah Yeah Yeahs guitarist Nick Zinner appearing on Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock: suggested cutting this.
• In March 2008, Twiggy stated through his Myspace blog that the band had begun work on their seventh studio album: as above, why do we care now what was reported as a future event then?
• Why is there a "[sic]" in the quote from Reznor? I don't see anything that looks like a grammatical error.
• At the beginning of 2010, Vrenna said that they were "talking and coming up with concepts" for their upcoming studio album: I think you could cut this.
• The CMYK coloring was also notable: I don't follow this. The colouring of the logo?
• , whilst indicating that production of their eighth studio album was "largely completed": suggest cutting this.
• Any reason why you use single quotes for quotations and double quotes for song titles? There's no need for these to be different. Not an issue for GA, just curious.
• Marilyn Manson are also confirmed to play at both the Mexican and Japanese dates of Slipknot's festival Knotfest: If this refers to 2016, as it appears to, it shouldn't read as if it's describing a future event.

  I see you fixed the tense, but given that we're in the past tense, shouldn't we say what they did, rather than what they were expected to do? If they appeared at both dates of Knotfest, let's say so; if we can't be sure they did, I'd drop this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:15, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

• Until his departure in 2002,[290] Twiggy was their chief musical contributor: we've just said Berkowitz was the main musical contributor until 1996, so I assume this means "After Berkowitz's departure..."; it should be clearer.
• Manson heads the direction of the band's sound, who has been influenced by: "who" isn't right here; I think it refers to Manson, so perhaps make it a semicolon instead of a comma, and then "he has been...".
• The first paragraph of "Impact and legacy" says three videos received five nominations, and then lists the awards for two of those three. Can this be shortened to eliminate the repetition?
• Coloradoan politicians such as Governor Bill Owens and Republican Representative Tom Tancredo accused Manson of promoting "hate, violence, death, suicide, drug use and the attitudes and actions of the Columbine High School killers," despite later reports that neither Harris or Klebold were fans. "Despite" is not the right word here; you say it was only later that it was reported that Harris and Klebold were not fans, so Owens and Tancredo didn't make their accusations despite the reports.
• while steadfastly maintaining: you might cut "steadfastly"; it's something of a value judgement and as such should not be in Wikipedia's voice.
• Footnotes 9 & 304 have "p." instead of "pp." for multiple pages.

That's it for a first pass. I see you've fixed quite a few of these already; I'll go back through and strike the resolved issues, either tonight or tomorrow. I'll also do a pass through the sources. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:56, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mike Christie:I think that I've addressed all of your concerns in some way at this point.--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Strikes above; I've left one more comment. You still have the harv error on Baddeley, and there is now also a harv error on footnote 9. I'll try to get to a sources review today. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:15, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Here are some comments on the sources and citations.

• You have inconsistent date formats ("October 6, 2006" along with "2016-06-25". This is not an issue for GA; I mention it in case you're thinking of going to FAC.
• Two harv errors, as mentioned above.
• Footnote 39 points at an alt.music post, which is not a reliable source, and it doesn't appear to support the given statement: "A seven-month headlining tour followed, during which the band began to debut new material".
• Footnote 259 is a link to YouTube, which is OK for the information cited, but the publisher information is missing from the citation. Not required for GA, just FYI.
• What makes the following sites reliable? I'm not asserting they're not reliable, but if I'm listing it here it's because I can't see evidence that they are. See here for some helpful notes. Sorry about the long list; if I were more familiar with the genre I would probably be aware of some of these already.
  • spookykids.net -- appears to be a fan site
  • blankmaninc.com -- per the disclaimer page it accepted user submissions, for example
  • providermodule.com -- appears to be a fan site
  • blistering.com
  • metalinsider.net
  • metalsucks.net - on the list
  • metalinjection.net
  • undercover.fm
  • thefifthcolumnnews.com
  • pinkisthenewblog.com
  • basetendencies.com as the archive of Ground Control Magazine -- for the website the question is whether it can be trusted to reliably archive the text; the underlying source in question is the magazine, which I am asking about as well
  • theprp.com
  • acharts.co
  • rockmusicstar.com -- appears to be a fan site
  • reflectionsofdarkness.com -- appears to be a fan site
  • crypticrock.com
  • rockrevoltmagazine.com
  • spookhouse.net
  • stereoboard.com
  • swaves.com
  • popstache.com
  • collectivelifestyle.com
  • alternativenation.net
  • 411mania.com -- per their about page the contributions are by independent bloggers
  • collectivelifestyle.com which appears to be what nyrock.com redirects to
  • vintagevinylnews.com
  • filmthreat.com (cited via IMDB) Film Threat is reliable.--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

    The problem is that because it's via IMDB I can't tell the date of the original article. Film Threat was reliable for a while, but was not originally and is not currently; it hasn't had an uninterrupted history of being an edited source. Do you have any way to tell when the review in question originally appeared in Film Threat? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:14, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

    I removed the link and the info derived from it

    OK. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

  • noisey.vice.com Noisey is a subdivision of Vice (magazine)--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

    OK. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:14, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

  • bloody-disgusting.com Bloody Disgusting is a site dedicated to horror fiction. I have seen it cited in multiple GAs.--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
  • habermas.org
  • musicfeeds.com.au
  • thefrontrowreport.com
  • vitainmusica.com
  • underthegunreview.net
  • bust.com on the list
  • highsnobiety.com Reputable fashion publication..--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

That's all of them. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:51, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: Would you be willing to tell me where those sources are cited so I can delete them if I find that they are unreliable sources? Thanks :)--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

All I'd do to find them is open up the article in source editing mode and do a search for the site name. If you can't find any of them, let me know. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:19, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I've seen MetalSucks and Metal Injection before. The former is definitely reliable; I think the latter is, but I'm not 100%. It's something I've used before. Danny from IP 104.39.26.229 (talk) 14:50, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

I struck one above and left a comment on another. I see Red marquis has cut quite a few citations, but I'm concerned that they did not alter the underlying text -- surely those citations were used to support something, and if they're going to be removed some text is presumably going to have to change too. For example, That April, Manson expressed interest in releasing the record in a different way from previous ones has lost its citation, and so has which would prove to be their first hit; I didn't check every edit but it can't be OK just to cut the citations. Re highsnobiety.com, it's not enough to say "reputable"; we need something that shows that. The link I left above has a good short list of ways to do that. You know, this has to have come up before; do the music WikiProjects keep a list of reliable sources with documentation on why they can be regarded as reliable? That would be a resource that reviews like this could use. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:14, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: I found the list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Sources

Thanks; good find! I've posted a query at the WikiProject talk page. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:01, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Red marquis' edits, I believe I've rectified the issue of removing sources but not removing the corresponding text: [12], [13]. The majority of their other edits dealt primarily with removing superfluous/excess sources: [14], [15], [16], [17]. Regarding this one, I believe the next reference (Biography.com) can still support the claim that "Sweet Dreams" was their first legitimate hit: since it goes on to say that "The song's music video was placed in heavy rotation on MTV", their first to do so, etc. Another one of their edits, this one, was merely replacing the Provider Module reference with the direct magazine reference, which I think is preferable anyway. I don't foresee there being another issue here. Regards. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@MagicatthemovieS: I'm planning to go search the talk archives of the Albums WikiProject for more information about the sources; I'll post updates there and eventually back here if there is consensus. That's likely to be a slow process, I'm afraid. In the meantime, can you make sure that the cites removed by Red Marquis did not leave anything uncited? I gave a couple of examples above but please check everything they deleted; in most cases they changed no text when they removed the cite, which is worrying. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@MagicatthemovieS:: Per the discussions at WT:WikiProject Albums, I'll accept MetalSucks, Metal Injection, Blistering, MusicFeeds, the PRP, Metal Insider, and Bloody Disgusting as OK. The rest I think need to be removed, along with the material they source, unless you have additional evidence of reliability. I'll also say, in case you're considering taking this article to FAC, that the ones I'm accepting here will get scrutinized again at FAC and may not be regarded as reliable. For GA I'm willing to take the consensus of the WikiProject, but that won't be regarded as definitive at FAC. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: Just to be clear, I currently have no plans to make anything a featured article. Also, how do you open an article in source editing mode? I'm sorry, I've gotten ten articles to GA status and I've never been asked to do this before.

@Mike Christie: I just removed all sketchy sources. Woohoo! The Knotfest issue has also been cleared up. I'm not sure what you want with the "triptych" issue; perhaps you could edit that part of the page yourself if that's not presumptuous?--MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

The whole of the second paragraph of the 'Holy Wood (In the Shadow of the Valley of Death) (2000–02)' section is dedicated to explaining the content of the band's triptych. I get what you're saying Mike Christie, but it'd be very difficult to explain the triptych before-the-fact (ie, in the 'Antichrist Superstar (1996–97)' section). I mean, I can't think of any way to discuss Mechanical Animals and Holy Wood (In the Shadow of the Valley of Death) in the Antichrist Superstar section without completely destroying the flow of the whole article. I think a better solution may be to just remove all mention of the triptych from before the second paragraph of Holy Wood. What do you think? Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:21, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

The triptych sentence seems OK now. I take your point, but for now we're OK. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:59, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Re the sources, it looks much better now. I still see references to a couple -- can you check to see if these need to be removed too?

• nyrock.com
• musicfeeds.au.com
• vitainmusica.com
• bust.com

@MagicatthemovieS: to answer a couple of questions from above: by "edit source" I just meant to edit the page. If you don't have the visual editor turned on, you're probably editing with the usual source editor, and you can do Ctrl-F (for PCs) searches to find text strings in the article inside the editing window. As for not having to do this: I'm basing my request to remove these sources on criterion 2b of the good article criteria, which specifies that only reliable sources can be used. If you've had good articles passed that included these sources, the reviewer didn't really do a full GA review. It's one of the more tedious parts of some reviews, and I think some reviewers do skimp on it.

Once these last two or three are taken care of I think this is pretty much ready for promotion. Thanks for all the work you've done on this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:59, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: All four problematic sources have been removed & replaced with good sources, specifically Rolling Stone, The Riverfront Times, and Variety, save for one of the musicfeeds.au.com sources, which had info which was contained in the sources surrounding it and was simply removed, and the other musicfeeds.au.com source, which was removed along with the info derived from it. Thanks for all of your hard work! --MagicatthemovieS) 17:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

With the unreliable sources removed we're good to go. Passing GA; congratulations. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:03, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marilyn Manson (band). 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/20160917035040/http://www.blazeradioonline.com/review-marilyn-manson-born-villian/ to http://www.blazeradioonline.com/review-marilyn-manson-born-villian/

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) 13:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Shouldn't glam rock be in the genres?

While Marilyn Manson isn't a glam rock band, they sure do have a tendency to make glam rock albums (e.g. Mechanical Animals and The High End of Low) and songs ( e.g. majority of MA, some songs from The Pale Emperor). And Mechanicals Animals was their first number 1 album! So, it really should be added. MarilynMansonFan96 (talk) 07:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Normally this wouldn't be a convincing argument, but I had already had this cross my mind - just hadn't discussed it. I am in favor of this change, but I think first maybe we need some additional sources - note every genre listed currently has 3+ sources (the only one that doesn't is gothic metal, which we avoided due to few albums holding that description and unnecessary overcrowding of the infobox). Given how popular Mechanical Animals was, that shouldn't be hard. dannymusiceditor ^oops 13:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

I tried to paste a link, but failed miserably. >_< How do I add a link to the flatlist?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarilynMansonFan96 (talk • contribs) 10:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

I think you're doing it wrong entirely. Hit the "cite" tab over the edit box, then go to "Templates", and fill in all the necessary information. Then we'll see how reliable it is. dannymusiceditor ^oops 17:11, 21 April 2018 (UTC)