Talk:Lists of punk bands

This article was nominated for deletion on January 3, 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lists of punk bands redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Organization

This is a really terrible way to organize the list. Can somebody switch this to organize it by nationality first and alphabetically under that? Deleuze 09:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This problem has mostly been fixed, except for alphabetization.Spylab 10:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the whole list has been alphabetized now. Can someone remove the "This list needs to be alphabetized to conform to a higher quality." from the top of the page (I don't know how). Rudie482 03:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Out Boy

...Since when did Fall Out Boy become "punk" aye?

Britney Spears is more punk than Fall Out Boy will ever be. And Simple Plan only counts as a "punk" band if you are 10 years old and don't know any better. Also, Operation Ivy were Ska.

This band does not belong on this list, so please do not add them. They should go on the pop punk list instead.Crescentia 17:20, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as "pop-punk". It's just fucking nails on a chalkboard. 75.157.11.107 (talk) 06:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

Operation Ivy and most third-wave ska bands need to be mentioned here. A lot of ska bands from that era have a punk aesthetic to their music and the influence and the crossover is not difficult to hear. One could argue this page to be an ambiguous list of bands related to the punk genre in some way and should include bands of different styles regardless of whether they are "punk enough". There should be links to other lists that tackle the different sub-genres (i.e. Hardcore, Crust Punk, etc.) at the bottom of the page. This list needs to be seriously cleaned up. There are a lot of bands that have no page and are not notable enough to warrant their own page, so they need not be listed here. Off to the side of the some of the bands, there is a listing of their activity (i.e. 1987-present). That should not be listed on the list itself and should be saved for the band's page. Some thoughts maybe?

ZAchAtTacK 12:05pm, 16 May 2007

If you only mean ska punk bands, then yes, they can be added here, because by definition they are a form of punk (and most ska punk bands are closer to punk & hardcore than they are to ska anyway). If a band has been described as some version of punk, then they can be added here, since the title is not specific. I agree with deleting any band that doesn't have its own Wikipedia article, and deleting the years next to band names. The dates of their activities belongs in their own articles, not here. I started that cleanup about a week ago, and I see that others have continued that. All that still needs to be done is alphabetize the band names. Another problem was that someone originally listed some band names in the form of Bandname, The, which is not the way things are done on Wikipedia. Another issue was that there were some individual people listed, but the title only mentions bands, so the list should conform to that. I don't see anything wrong with adding a See Also section with links to other related lists, so go ahead and add them if you want. Spylab 10:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Chemical Romance

This band is not punk. They may use elements of it, but otherwise, just alternative rock with 70s influences. 128.205.153.171 15:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who would include them here? That really takes the cake.Crescentia 03:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

its a bit weird to edit this two years after it was finnished, but I agree, Yet, they're still on the list. I just really dont here any trace of punk in their music. I want them off the list. Filthy little weasel (talk) 07:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Major problem

This list is redundant with the pages List of musicians in the first wave of punk music and List of musicians in the second wave of punk music, which are in the Punk Template. Something needs to be redirected or deleted. WesleyDodds 01:34, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to clean up this page...

There are a lot of bands on here who barely have any info on them in Wiki. A good way to clean this page would be to exclude all bands who have no or barely any info on themselves. Less than a paragraph of info should not be considered a Wiki article. If a band has been influential in the movement or is important enough then they should have a longer article. This same method has worked on the gothic rock band page. Also, radio friendly pop bands disguised as punk outfits do not belong here. Pop punk ought to have it's own list.Crescentia 00:01, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is already a list of pop punk bands right here. Rudie482 04:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I didn't see that!That's a good thing. :-)Crescentia 13:40, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I am excluding metalcore bands since they are more influenced by metal than hardcore. I have listened to each one I am getting rid of and they all sound like metal. They ought to have their own list.Crescentia 01:43, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pop punk and Metalcore need their own lists.....

Both of those genres really don't fall into the punk catergory. Pop punk is most often commercialised and goes against what the punk ethos originally stood for: originality and going against 'the system' in some manner.. Metalcore, on the other hand, is more influenced by metal than punk itself. If a layman were to listen to it they would think that it was straight up metal. There are, of course, some punk bands, such as Suicidal Tendencies, who turned more and more metal as the years passed on, but in the end they were originally punk bands.Crescentia 03:39, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found out that pop punk already has own list.Crescentia 13:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do NOT add bands that do not have a Wiki article

Please stop adding bands that do not have a Wiki article. Also, bands that have only a small paragraph of information about themselves should not be included. At the top of the article for this subject it says notable bands. A band should not be considered notable if it does not have a Wiki link, or if their article barely has any information.Crescentia 14:44, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop adding Rise Against...

From a musical standpoint this band sounds totally pop punk and should go on that list instead.Crescentia 15:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that Rise Against is no where NEAR pop punk. Article declares them as Punk, Hardcore Punk, and Melodic Punk. I see NOTHING about pop punk. Which I'm quite certain gives them a reason to be on this list. --71.199.77.215 01:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rise Against have the heavily distorted guitars, driving hardcore drum beats, and political lyrics that make up a good hardcore band. I don't really see that they have much in common with pop-punk. Perhaps you should listen to something of theirs besides Swing Life Away? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.0.149 (talk) 08:40, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Iskra/Black Kronstadt

I went ahead and added Iskra since I know they have an article of more than paragraph link. Also, I would suggest adding Black Kronstadt (the early incarnation of Iskra) even though they do not have an article. Frankly I don't know why they don't. If they are influential enough to end up on an episode of Sirius Hard Attack Bloody Roots: Anarcho-Punk, then they really should have an article. As it were, they were a very influential crust/anarcho-punk unit and someone needs to write them an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.0.149 (talk) 08:46, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Advise

do the article like this [[1]] far cleaner and less long. METALFREAK04 20:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I personally preferred the old layout, I think it was easier to read. Rudie482 01:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

really? i like this one, as it looks more professional. ah well can't meet all peeps demands and aspirations. i would put flags up, but i dont know that many punk bands lol. METALFREAK04 19:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flags

I will and some helpers will do flags for all of these bands here. nick them off the link i gave you last time up ther^^. any volenteers? METALFREAK04 19:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start working on it but I can't promise how far I'll get before I get bored. Rudie482 22:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I started working on it and everything's definitely gonna need to be reformatted when it's done. Rudie482 22:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion all those flag templates make the whole page sluggish and squirrely. I've got a high-speed cable connection, and it still takes this page way too long to load, and then it's more difficult than it should be to scroll through it. ~~The flags are pretty, but I think the icons should be changed to plaintext country abbreviations to make the list more accessible and usable.~~ Consult this page: Wikipedia:Avoid template creep, which encourages the removal of "inappropriate, excessive, or trivial inclusions of otherwise worthy templates" --ShelfSkewed Talk 23:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A proposal to alleviate the problem: Sort the bands by country first, then alphabetically. A single flag icon per country is then all that's needed.--ShelfSkewed Talk 04:45, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That invovles to much work, and your computer is shit if it doesn't load this....I am on a college computer and using IE and it loads completely in like seconds...**** —Preceding unsigned comment added by METALFREAK04 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs cleaned up

This list needs some cleanup. Each link should be checked to see if it goes to an actual band... many entries appear to just be common words that link to either a dab list or a dictionary entry. Also many of the entries are pop-punk bands or alt. rock bands. The article title says "punk bands" not mixed genre or bands that look punk but play something totally different. The list is pretty much useless and can/should be replaced with the already existing category. It doesn't even have an opening paragraph to lay out what it is? 156.34.221.33 (talk) 13:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The beauty of a wiki, you can do that yourself, if you really want to. To me, punk is not my thing, I do not know enough punk to sort this out. but get a few lads with you and everything will be done. METALFREAK04 (talk) 11:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go through and check links/get rid of the blatantly non-punk bands. As always, people get into arguments over bands such as Green Day and whether they're punk or not, so I won't take off any of the ones I'm not sure about. Reading through this, two bands immediately jumped out at me: Angels and Airwaves and Elvis Costello. I can see why they would be put on this list and maybe have punk overtones, but neither of them are punk bands by any means. If my edits are horrible, feel free to put back any bands I took off. Rudie482 (talk) 00:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, i've been going through some of these bands lists lately, cleaning them up, and this one is quite good, at least it doesn't have hundreds of dead links where some teenager has created an article about his band, added it to the list, and the article then gets deleted. Good work --Jac16888 (talk) 23:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose we improve this article as I suggested when the article was nominated for deletion. Essentially the list would be something like this:

…

d.b.s. ( 1992-2001) – A melodic punk rock band formed in North Vancouver, British Columbia.

…

Propagandhi ( 1986-present) – An anarchist punk rock/thrash band formed in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.

…

Television ( 1973-78, 1992-93, 2001-present) – An art punk band formed in New York City.

…

− Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 19:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funeral Dress

This band seems to have the wrong flag in front of its name. It's supposed to be Belgian, not British. Can anyone fix this?

~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.118.142.42 (talk) 15:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fixed it--Jac16888 (talk) 15:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic Youth

Sonic Youth is awesome, but they are not a punk band. While they certainly have punk influences, they are better classified as alternative, indie rock, noise rock, or experimental/art rock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.30.217.115 (talk) 02:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

If anyone can be smart enough to make this list up to the standards of List of thrash metal bands that be great. Look there, it's great. Except I don't personnally like the list structure without the flags but the introduction is a nice touch to this kind of page. METALFREAK04 (talk) 17:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the HyperZombieNumbskulls

Okay I might not be doing this correctly; and I apologize as I am not familiar with the correct approach to suggest an addition on Wiki: however, i respectfully request that "The HyperZombieNumbSkulls" be added as an American Punk Band. We do have a Wiki page and have recently reunited and are recording a new album. We were a Boulder, CO cult punk band (1982-86) that extended the genre into punk trance music. We now hail from Asheville, NC and are similar in sound to Social Distortion. It would Be an honor to be listed. Please let me know at sullivan594@gmail.com Thank youSullivan594 (talk) 05:12, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]