Talk:Chuck Schuldiner

Frank Schuldiner's death

several people have attempted to change Frank S's cause of death to that of 'car accident' when in fact he was killed when a gun accidentally discharged.

4 July - the fact that Jane S has stated at emptywords.org that Frank died via an auto accident doe not actually make it true. Her grief is certainly understandable, having lost both sons, but historical revisionism has no place at Wikipedia. The fact remains that Frank was killed when a gun accidentally discharged while he was playing with a cousin. This led to turmoil within the two families since the reckless misadventure was never fully explained upon investigation. Perhaps this is why Jane has chosen to invent an alternate story. Therefore, out of respect, why don't we merely put that Frank died in 'an accident', with no specifics?

this bio on Chuck

This article states that Schuldiner began playing guitar at the age of 9, however in the book "Choosing Death" by Albert Mudrian, he is quoted saying "When I first started the band I'd only been playing guitar for six or seven months, I couldn't even play a lead". Schuldiner was 15 at the time that Mantas was formed. Can anyone clarify this? Answer: his mother has stated that Chuck had his first guitar following his brother Frank's accidental death, in hopes it would help his grieving. This doesn't mean that Chuck actually studied or played the guitar at that young age. The biography by Mudrian could certainly still be correct as Chuck might not have started seriously playing until he was a teenager. A Sniper Someone needs to fill out more biography information. Jon Seitz 21:06, August 27, 2005 (UTC) hey as it stands, seeing as who he was, this article is a joke but i'm gonna help make it better, IM me:AIM itzelial if you have any information i could use, like if you have old metal edge magazines or whatever, whatever is relevant and can be verified. problem is of course, his death was just before the internet age, all the of information isn't on the web, so this article needs a expert - chuck super fan - or at least somebody who can discuss this with me and others and work towards getting this article worthy of the man it represents. Mithotyn 01:42, 11 November 2005 (UTC) Yes, I completly agree. And whoever did the last edit should know that this is suppossed to be completly objective. It was nice and creative, and would fit well in an obituary. Feel free to restore it if you can make it objective (ex. millions of fans feel that . . .) I don't know too much about him, so we really need an expert. Freeflux

I'm working on it. (2/28/2006) Johnson542

I have a lot of information on Chuck and I have special permission to use anything on his memorial site (emptywords.org) in order to complete his wikipedia biography. Feel free to email me about anything Chuck related.

Hi Matt,

You can take your information from EmptyWords as long as the source is mentioned we're okay with that.

Good luck Greetings ~yvonne~ www.emptywords.org

---

Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

Van: Matt Johnson [1] Verzonden: zaterdag 25 februari 2006 10:32 Aan: sitekeepers@emptywords.org Onderwerp: Chuck on Wikipedia

Hi, I was curious if I could use a picture on your site on Wikipedia.org. Just in case you were not aware, there is a page on Chuck at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Schuldiner. An image of him was recently removed due to lack of source information, and I feel that this page is not complete without a photo. I would also like to know if you would rather that I use a different image than the one I have picked out (http://www.emptywords.org/LyricsITP1.jpg). I have just begun editing the page (all pages on Wikipedia are open for public editing) and I believe some of the information on the page was already taken from your site. I was curious to know if I could use information on Emptywords.org to help fans of metal in their research. Emptywords.org is already referenced at the bottom of the page. Thanks for your time, +Matt Johnson

---

Not verified

"Although Schuldiner never married or had children, he was engaged to a woman named Kim when he died. The couple's marriage may have been postponed by Schuldiner's cancer treatments." -- I never heard of this before. Can somebody please provide a source for this!!?? It was added by an anon! [2]

The couple's marriage may have been postponed. Is this speculation perhaps? It was even worse before with "probably been postponed".

If nobody doesn't provide a source for this I'll remove it. Death2 13:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I will remove it, for there is no source - Jane Schuldiner has said that he DATED a woman named Kim, but there has been no mention of any engagement. 70.59.9.65 16:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually Chuck did say he had a fiance in a later interview, so I'm assuming that's Kim he was talking about.

One cannot assume anything without an actual source. The facts speak that Chuck at one time had a girlfriend named Kim (Robinson), and there is no evidence that they were ever 'engaged'.

Chuck confirms in an interview[3](question 4) that he was engaged. However, he doesnt specify whether or not it was Kim.

According to what I've read, Chuck was in a relationship with Kim when he died. So I would assume that if he was engaged with anyone it was her. But let's not speculate these things.

---

Just cleaned up the initial paragraphs a bit, rephrased some things but no content or implications have been changed. Ghostreveries 10:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

The intro about him...

"He was also an innovator and pioneer of the death metal genre itself. On a creative level, Death was one of the first bands to implement jazz structure in death metal." He was not an innovator or a pioneer of "the death metal genre itself". There are many death metal bands that predate Death, and death were more of a deathrash band really IMO. Death WAS NOT one of the first bands to implement jazz structure in death metal. God who the hell put that there? Death NEVER had a jazz-influenced style of death metal. If you are going to say The Sound of Perseverance did (to which you are wrong anyhow), I will tell you that Death's later stuff was PROGRESSIVE metal. Just because it is 'progressive' does not mean it was jazz-styled. If any idiot here thinks they know more about death metal than I; I suggest you take a peak at the [death metal page] before making a fool of yourself. I am now going to change/remove this, and please, Chuck-fanboys: don't just change it back again...I like Death, but you don't have to idolize Chuck and the band. Last night I removed something from the intro about Chuck being 'one of the greatest and most influential guitarists in metal history'. That is idiocy. Sure, I too think he was good, but there is no need to present such an OPINION (which I would say is not true) in an online ENCYCLOPAEDIA. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Isilioth (talk • contribs) 08:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC).

Many of the earlier death metal bands had huge thrash influences, which is natural as death metal mostly evolved from thrash, except that especially in Europe many bands had a more hardcore punk background (Carcass, Bolt Thrower, Napalm Death, Entombed). Besides which death metal bands really predate Death/Mantas (ie. are founded earlier than 1983)? Death is defnitively one of the most influential death metal bands - that's undeniable. Spearhead 08:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll agree with you Isilioth that the jazz thing is silly - it should certainly state progressive. You'll note also that I did not re-insert the 'one of the greatest and most influential guitarists in metal history' as I agree it is ridiculous and totally OTT. However, that Schuldiner is considered an innovator of the genre (and his band's place within its history. with SBG as a template) is virtually unchallenged in any reliable printed or internet work on metal. Remember that a person does not have to be a 'Chuck-fanboy' to want to get information correctly. We're all well aware of Seven Churches, etc. but that doesn't downplay Schuldiner's immense importance in the scheme of things A Sniper 09:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Sure, he was an innovator of Death Metal (although Death were never as heavy as any of the other death metal bands to come in the next 3 years after their debut), but why does Chuck deserve more credit than any of the other death metal musicians? He contributed to death metal: but no more than any of the other guys in the early death metal years. If you go to a page on any other dm musician from that era, you won't find much about them being oh so innovative and contributed oh so much. This is due to there being so many "Chuck-fanboy"s. There are too many people who idolize him. I assume it was you, A Sniper, who now changed the intro to "On a creative level, Death was one of the first bands to implement more of a progressive style into death metal. ". That is not true either. Death didn't become progressive until the mid-late 90s (not sure on album release years), and which time they stopped being death metal. I am hence going to remove this. Please note that I do like Death, but i hate the way they are portrayed as being the be-all, end-all. Let's try to create an article that shows some the straight facts, and not something biased due to everyone loving Death so much. Chuck might have been an "innovator", but why do people have to give him special treatment over all the other death metal musicians... The Answer: Because he's dead. --Isilioth

Almost any reference on Schuldiner (music reference publications, metal writers, tape traders, etc.) consider him to have been an 'innovator' of the genre, dead or alive. This is merely fact. I agree with you that idolizing Schuldiner has no place on Wikipedia (hence why fawning gush about Schuldiner being the 'greatest guitarist' to ever live, etc., has been edited out), but neither has diminishing a person's accomplishments. A Sniper 21:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Someone (probably A Sniper, i assume it was you) has now changed a sentence to: "He played an important role in the early days of death metal with his band Death, which later inserted progressive metal elements into the band. ". Why the hell would you change it to that. Death was a deathrash (very 'thrashy' death metal) band to begin with. In the later years, they became a PROGRESSIVE METAL band. NOT a progressive death metal band. They were never both progressive and death at the same time. I am changing it back to how I had it, don't change it back please...Death wasnt a death metal band after Chuck "inserted progressive metal elements into the band." I also don't think it should say "Technical Death Metal" under Chuck's genres. The technicality he was known for was in his later (progressive metal) works. His early (death metal) works were simplistic (for metal standards at least). Hell, they only spent three weeks writing one of their early albums (Human i think?) I'm going to change technical death metal to progressive metal. Just because he at one stage made death metal, and at another made technical metal, does not mean that his death metal was technical. -- Isilioth

I'll agree Isilioth that what Death evolved into is more rightly described as 'progressive' than 'technical' (albeit Schuldiner's solos, even from SBG, were quite technically proficient and this was further enhanced album by album, and with the addition of other technical players such as Murphy and Masvidal), and your edit is a sound & logical one. However, claiming that Schuldiner et al somehow ceased to be death metal entirely, hence becoming progressive metal in total, could be challenged for NPOV. This is the reason that I would think the facts speak more strongly for claiming that from SBG in 1987 to the final Death release there was a progression and not an abandonment. By the way, Human was written for well over a year by Schuldiner in the aftermath of Butler and Andrews' termination in 1990. A Sniper 06:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, but how many other death metal bands have had technically proficient solos? More than a handful, thats for sure. Trey Azagthoth IMO has done some of the best lead guitar work in death metal, but Morbid Angel is still classed just as "Death Metal". Technical Death is usually used for bands that implement styles such as jazz into death. Quote from the death metal: "Technical death metal is musically characterized by chaotic riffs, atypical rhythms, polished production, and rapidly changing time signatures." Anyway, I agree with what youve set it to now. By the way, sorry, it wasn't Human (lol), it was Individual Thought Patterns that they wrote in 3 weeks. Gene Hoglan (drummer at the time) said this in an interview with Metal Maniacs. Isilioth 01:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

We're agreed all around then - excellent! Pleasure to work it out with you in a logical, productive manner. All hail... A Sniper 01:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. Thanks for not being an arrogant, ignorant fanboy. :) Isilioth 10:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I fail to see how you can say that Death was never both progressive and death metal. They were definatley a huge influence to many death metal bands that came after them and are still a big influence on various other bands

Uhh...were saying that Death was a death metal band in their early days, in their later days they were progressive metal. What I was pointing out is that they were never progressive death metal...whoever you are. Please sign your comments. Isilioth 13:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Dream Theater??

"Later in his career Schuldiner cited progressive metal bands such as Watchtower, Dream Theater, and Queensryche frequently as influences. Chuck's mother claims that he enjoyed all forms of music except country and rap. He also apparently particularly enjoyed jazz and classical music in addition to metal and British alternative acts such as Lush."

This is not correct, http://www.emptywords.org/Pit06-99.htm. "I could sit here all day naming players that I grew up on that inspired me, but very few players in the '90s interest me at all. Take John Petrucci from DREAM THEATER. He is a great technical player but his playing doesn't give me that feeling in my gut that I feel when I hear Dave Murray play. " XXMurderSoulXx 08:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

religion should be cut down

If his father was Jewish and his mom was a convert to judaism, but he lived in a irreligious home, I think the religion part should be trimmed abit. It is about chuck, and since he said religion doesn't play a part in his music, I think it would be fitting that it doesn't play much of a part in this artical in his memory.--Equilibriummike (talk) 14:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that the facts should nevertheless be stated. Chuck's Mom Jane converted to Judaism, and Chuck was considered Jewish at birth. Chuck never denied this fact throughout his life and self-identified as "Jewish". I agree that no particular issue re: religion should be focused upon in the article, but the facts describe the man and should therefore remain. What idea did you have re: trimming? Cheers, A Sniper 12:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

It just seems unnecessarily long and meaningless to his legacy, considering it didn't really play a big part in who he was, or what he did. Not saying it shouldn't be stated but I think others would agree that it's to much for this article. What idea for trimming? I don't know, I would maybe leave that to others who contributed to this article.--Equilibriummike (talk) 01:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Single-purpose account Jackmantas

I regret that the above user appears to be trolling articles I've contributed to and making blanking attempts, deletions, and whatever else. This appears to be based on malicious intent (for want of any other explanation) and not on verifiability, good faith or interest in the article topics. Cheers, A Sniper (talk) 21:02, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Lack of Neutrality and Conflict of interest.

I am questioning the neutrality of this article. Particularily the assertion that "Music Biographers" have referred to Mr. Schuldiner as "The Father of Death Metal" If "Music Biographers" (plural) have referred to him by this title then why is the editor who is adding this information only able to provide one (single) reference to back up this assertion? Also, the reference he is using is a very obscure website ("All Music"). Also, who has ever heard of this writer that is making this rather misguided claim? (Ed Rivadavia?) Bring in a writer like Malcolm Dome from Kerrang Magazine or somebody like that and then you will have an expert on this subject.

When you visit this website (All music.com) you will see a menu of different categories of music that you can click on and they are: Rock, Jazz, R&B,Rap,Country ,Blues, World, Electronica, Classical and More.

Click on "more" and you still don't see even Heavy Metal, much less Death Metal. You are going to try to tell me that this website is an authority on the subject of Death Metal? I'm having my doubts. Regardless, he hasn't produced more than one source, so the editor's assertion that multiple music biographers have referred to him as "The Father of Death Metal" has not been verified.

Now on to the subject of a conflict of interest. This editor, Username: A Sniper, was by his own admission, the manager for Mr. Schuldiner, so he would seem to have a vested interest in asserting this "Father of Death Metal" claim as a statement of fact. Thus, I assert we have a conflict of interest and to maintain the high standards of Wikipedia, this editor should step aside and allow a more neutral party to add or delete information from this article. That's all for now.

Thanks,

Jackmantas

if you'd bother to do some research, which is the reason Wikipedia exists, you'd find that Malcolm Dome wrote several articles on Chuck and Death[4] - he wrote for Metal Forces. Speaking of Kerrang, Mr. Jackmantas, this is what they said about Chuck Schuldiner (KERRANG number 885 - Date of issue: Jan 5 2001) when he died: "Chuck Schuldiner was one of the most significant figures in the history of metal"[5]. Check the incredibly large cache of articles found at www.emptywords.org. Now, please stop trolling me and editing things out of spite. A Sniper (talk) 23:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Verification needed on views concerning drug abuse

I have placed "citation needed" flags after unverified statements concerning Mr. Schuldiner's alleged views on drug abuse. I think we need to be very accurate on these controversial subjects to protect Mr. Schuldiner's reputation. If no references can be found, these statements should be deleted. Discuss. --Jackmantas (talk) 03:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I have deleted the comments concerningMr. Schuldiner's alleged views on drug abuse. As is stated above, I flagged them lastnight and a little later another editor came and immediately deleted them, something that I probably should have done in the first place. Very soon after that another editor came and put them back up without discussion, screaming loudly in his edit summary: "The man is DEAD!" So since that editor didn't bother to come here and discuss, I will assume his point is that totally unverified, potentially defamatory statements can be left on a person's biography as long as they are not among the living? I myself am trying to figure out what is wrong with leaving the remarks deleted until somebody produces solid verification. I attempted to search for verification myself and all I could find was other websites that had cut and pasted this wikipedia biography onto their own site which in my mind not only leaves these statements totally unverified but points to how much more defamatory the remarks have become. Jackmantas (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Since you're totally unfamiliar with Chuck Schuldiner and the band Death, and have diminished his importance in the context of modern music (on this very page), yet continue to troll on this site, it might seem logical that you'd think the small paragraph on drugs is 'defamatory' to Chuck. Editors familiar with Death know this is not the case. If you want to be useful, you could go to emptywords.org yourself and dig through the mountains of interviews, reviews, etc. to find the appropriate reference for what is already accepted as fact: Chuck was against hard drugs but an avid pot smoker. Or maybe you feel that the paragraph would only be of interest to 'fanboys'? The comment 'the man is DEAD' referred to a user who believed Chuck to still be alive, and his comment was re: biographies of living persons, and the user apologized for the edit made in error. A Sniper (talk) 20:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

So I've "diminished his importance in the context of modern music" huh? Wow, I must be pretty powerful. I feel like a real Metal God now! Seriously though, isn't that what you were trying to do when you sued him? Diminish his importance? Or just get some cash from him? Jackmantas (talk) 02:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Slaughter?

I have placed a citation needed flag after the statement claiming that Mr. Schuldiner was once a member of Slaughter. I would think Mr. Schuldiner, were he still with us, would resent being falsely accused of being a member of a band such as Slaughter which is pretty much universally recognized by true Headbangers as "Poser Metal." If this claim cannot be verified it should be deleted. Discuss. --Jackmantas (talk) 03:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

It is not THAT Slaughter (featuring Mark Slaughter). Why don't you go and work on pages of which you have some competence or knowledge instead of trolling after me in areas where you don't appear to be adding anything constructive? You have now made a reference to Malcolm Dome without any idea that he wrote very positive things about Chuck from the beginning of the Death career. Now you don't know the difference between two bands from different genres and countries who happen to have the same name. Any expert editor in this field knows this. This trolling thing is going a bit too far, don't you think? Instead of obsessing on Greif and Schuldiner, go edit in places where you can make a genuine positive impact on Wikipedia. Fondly, A Sniper (talk) 04:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well Oops, my bad. No reason to be rude about things, though. So you want to play hardball huh? No problem. Now that you mention it, I do remember that there were two Slaughters. That distinction needs to be made in the main article I think, because nobody remembers them anyway except total fanboys. I think I'll do that when I get done here. That Canadian Slaughter was EXTREMELY obscure, so I had totally forgotten about them. Not very good as I remember either. BTW, did you manage them too....lol. As far as the Malcolm Dome thing goes, If you knew so much about what he had said about Mr. Schuldiner, then why did you wait until I had said something to you about it to then google it? Huh? Come on admit it. You didn't know he had ever said anything about Chuck until I mentioned Malcolm Dome. Then you googled it and found some references and then tried to act like you had known it all along. You know it and I know it. I used to read magazines like Kerrang and Metal Forces religiously but that's when I was much younger. I didn't read anything around the time that Chuck passed away. Besides that, you know how they make a big deal out of people when they die. And you too. Since you managed him for a while, you are trying to make Death and Chuck Schuldiner out to be a bigger phenomenon than they really are. So you can make yourself out to be something bigger than you really are. Oh and of course your managerial relationship with him ended in a lawsuit. He fired you and then he was forced to rehire you by a lawsuit settlement! Now that's something to be proud of isn't it? I bet he hated you by the time he passed away. Oh and I'd might as well say it, I bet you were a contributing factor in his brain cancer. Sound unlikely? Well, there are a lot of people who think that Andy Kaufman developed lung cancer due in large part to his contentious relationship with SNL's Lorne Michaels. He had never smoked a day in his life! So you think about it. I bet you worried the poor guy to death. I can just imagine from the way you are on here how nasty you must be to deal with in real life. Oh and as far as you being some kind of a Metal expert, come on. You admit yourself on your autobiography that you have been photographed in metal magazines in "Morrisey" and "The Smiths" t-shirts....lol. No self-respecting metalhead would be caught dead in a shirt like that. Also, I wouldn't recommend you wear a shirt like that to next Death Metal show you MC....lol. What's next? A New Kids on the Block shirt?..lol Anyway, you are just a poser that has come on here and tried to act like some kind of Metal expert because you know a little bit about a few bands that you managed. You're not fooling me. Okay I think I'm done now. Anyway, sorry to the rest of the Wikipedia family for that outburst. I'm not normally like this. Actually I am very well mannered most of the time. I just thought it was time somebody gave Mr. Grief a taste of his own medicine. Love and Kisses, --Jackmantas (talk) 07:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

How can an editor respond to such attacks that have nothing to do with article edits? You have made unsubstantiated and bitter accusations, not to mention tarnishing Chuck Schuldiner's importance on his article's talk page. Unbelievable. Anyone who crawls through your edit history can see you've been trolling around as a single-purpose account making malicious edits for the sole purpose of ridicule. Your work on this page, and your comments above illustrate that you couldn't care less about the article or the subject of the article. A Sniper (talk) 07:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)