Jump to content

Talk:Skrillex/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Live photo

Can anyone confirm whether or not the live photo from Ogden (2005) is actually Sonny Moore? Not sure how this actually made it to the page because 1. It absolutely does not look like him, 2. Sonny Moore had a longer hair style in 2005 as you would see in a\\\\\\\kjvccfssdfjhjkl;kjhgfdesdfrgtyuiny quick google search and 3. There are numerous live photos of Sonny Moore that show him with more clarity that this bizarre photograph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.163.242.28 (talk) 20:22, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Spiritual Beliefs?

We really need to tap into this. It's what our readers want to know.

Skrillex is not a dubstep producer.

Hello guys, I think that dubstep must be removed from the genres list of Skillex, dubstep consists of a half time drum pattern, a 140 bpm tempo, the moderate use of sub-bass no midrange agressive basslines, dark chill mood, and it's influenced by Dub music, a song doesn't need wobble and drops to be dubstep, it might be categorized as brostep but not dubstep. The wobble influence only appeared years after this genre has existed, and drops are only the basic elements of brostep. If you don't believe me just listen to some digital mystikz, kode9, biome, n-dread, the earliest works of skream and benga, those are the real pioneers of traditionnal dubstep. Skrillex's music is more in the electro/banger house side because it doesn't have the same dubby dark mood that is supposed to define dubstep, whilst dubstep is very chill and full of vibes, skrillex's music is more energetic and agressive and has a heavy metal influence and consists only of heavy bass drops and midrange agressive basslines and doesn't follow the basics of dubstep. It hurts also the majority of real dubstep listeners that grew up in this genre because the dubstep genre is now bastarized and it's hated by people who seems to confuse skrillex's music with dubstep (Whenever you hear someone hating on dubstep he immediatly refers to Skrillex). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estreet2007 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately Wikipedia prefers to contain what is cited and can be verified, rather than what are the estimations and opinions of individual editors. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

It's not about opinion, dubstep definition is a fact, if you consider skrillex saying that he's making dubstep as a source you're wrong. Skrillex is not a reliable source, he's by himself very new to the dubstep scene and he has never been a raver, he was in a screamo band (get it, the difference between screamo and dubstep is extremely gigantic) and he said that he was inspired by IDM artists, I don't get it, why people don't try to acknowledge the fact that he has never been into the dubstep sub-culture. the only artists he colaborated with are brostep producers such as Datsik and Excision. I'm pretty sure that you didn't read carefully what I wrote; just listen to some digital mystikz, kode9, biome, n-dread, the earliest works of skream and benga and you'll realize what dubstep is actually about. Seriously this is getting really annoying, dubstep is being ruined because nobody is taking this whole debate seriously. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estreet2007 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Skrillex never said he makes dubstep. There are multiple reliable sources stating he produces dubstep (i.e. The Guardian). In addition, brostep is simply a genre of dubstep. Even if he can be classified more specifically, it's still a type of dubstep. AntiCommons (talk) 16:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Your definition of what dubstep is is based on your opinion. Your analysis of Skrillex's music is based on your opinion and your analysis. I'm not saying you are wrong, or right, just that it doesn't matter what you think is "fact". This is why the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is not what is fact, but what is verifiable. I don't have to listen to any of your suggestions because my opinion and analysis of what Skrillex music is isn't relevant either. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

The definition of dubstep I gave is clearly from wikipedia and dubstep pioneers and original fanbase, I didn't add anything that is related to my opinion. The guardian source also doesn't explain why skrillex has dubstep elements in his music, that's why this article is not really reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estreet2007 (talk • contribs) 17:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

But your whole argument is based on the you listening to Skrillex, and then you deciding it's not dubstep, and you deciding that in order for it to be dubstep he must first be into what you define as dubstep sub-culture and dubstep pioneers. Do you see the problem? What you think isn't notable, even if you are 100% correct. Other, notable, sources think he is dubstep, therefore they win. And in regards to "real dubstep listeners" you might want to read about No true Scotsman, it's a logical fallacy. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
To be fair, this issue is addressed in at least one reliable source, here. It is not a slam dunk, but it at least does express some doubt about Skillex's dub credentials. Personally, I would not put it in the article per WP:UNDUE, but if more sources appear we can revisit the issue. Speciate (talk) 19:35, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Many musical genres have purists who'll argue until the end of time who is, and isn't, deemed worthy of being known by their favoured genre. Why it matters I don't follow. Every category of music has its own good and bad practitioners ("good" and "bad", of course, being a matter of personal opinion). It's rarely worth bothering about and even more rarely worth mentioning in Wikipedia. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:18, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Why does Wikipedia have Skrillex as a Brostep artist but not a Dubstep artist on the Dubstep article, yet on his own page it says he is Dubstep? 92.7.84.0 (talk) 21:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Because Escape Orbit babysits the article 24/7 so people cant undermine his precious Skrillex. 92.7.83.154 (talk) 17:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, calling Skrillex "dubstep" and nothing more is just inaccurate. I think brostep should at least be ADDED to the genres, even if it can't replace the dubstep tag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomebriks (talk • contribs) 08:57, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 March 2012

Vandalism request removed 86.174.144.45 (talk) 16:32, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Requesting someone vandalises the page for you. Neat idea.  Not done --Escape Orbit (Talk) 19:36, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

THIS IS WHAT?????????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theskrillexallknower (talk • contribs) 08:22, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

April Fools day prank

reddit is talking about playing an April Fools day prank saying Skrillex is dead on 31 March http://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/rawgs/rip_skrillex_the_april_fools_prank/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.33.30.56 (talk) 04:20, 24 March 2012 (UTC) why you do this?!

Yep - and somebody's made the edit. Could someone please revert it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.141.214 (talk) 05:19, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

'Dubstep' under genres be specified as 'brostep.'

When the word dubstep is mentioned, people usually associate it with either the early South London UK Garage/Dub based sound, or the newer subgenre known as 'brostep' (Please read Wikipedia's article on the early dubstep characteristics - [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubstep#Characteristics ], and brostep characteristics- [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubstep#.22Brostep.22_and_American_developments ] if you are unfamiliar with the characterisitcs of the music.

I think it is in the best interest that we specify the certain style of dubstep Skrillex produces in order to enforce organization, specification and accuracy. A large amount of verifiable references, several which have been cited on Wikipedia, state Skrillex's productions are, or draw heavy influence from, the 'brostep' subgenre of dubstep.

The following are links (presumably verifiable as they have been linked to and cited on the Wikipedia dubstep page's brostep section) that examplify the diferentiation of Skrillex's productions from the earlier type of dubstep.

http://thequietus.com/articles/07606-skream-interview

http://digitalissue.miaminewtimes.com/publication/?i=93270&p=41

http://www.spin.com/articles/dubstep-101-us-primer

In conlcusion, I am basically on my virtual knees begging for 'dubstep' under Skrillex's genres to be changed to 'brostep.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpaceNTimeForADime (talk • contribs) 02:49, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

To address your points;
  • Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference for itself. So it doesn't really matter what other articles say. It also doesn't matter if, in your estimation, what they say can be applied to Skrillex. What only matters what the cites say.
  • Your first link doesn't mention "brostep" at all, so we can discount it.
  • Your second link notes that some people have disparagingly call Skrillex "brostep". That does not mean that Wikipedia, which sets out to be neutral, should.
  • Your third link again notes that some music is disparagingly called "brostep", but does not say it applies to Skrillex, who is mentioned elsewhere.
So all you are offering is that some people may call Skrillex brostep, especially if they don't like it. If we were to assign genres on that basis, then every time someone published a negative description of a band, it could then be added as a genre. For "brostep" to go in as a genre would need one of two things;
  • Skrillex describes his music as brostep.
  • An authoritative source described it as brostep, and not as someone elses opinion, and not an attempt to belittle or criticize it.
If you really think it's notable, you might create a "criticism" section that discusses the whole dubstep/brostep dispute in relation to Skrillex. But please ensure it contains something more than "Some people don't like Skrillex and they don't like it being called dubstep, so have made up another name for it". That is not notable. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Why would Skrillex have to classify himself as brostep? If that was how it worked, emo would never even be a genre of music. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomebriks (talk • contribs) 09:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

From First to Last Albums

The link the the From First to Last album "Heroine" has a typo in the link and redirects to a non-existent page. Fix this, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.138.145.10 (talk) 02:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Ruffneck (FULL Flex) [Munchi Anonymous Revolution Remix]

The Munchi Anonymous Revolution Remix of Ruffneck is listed as "being more characteristic of Electro House, though with a much slower tempo of 108 BPM, versus the original version's classic Dubstep tempo of 140 BPM, also straying from the typical Electro House tempo of 128 BPM." This song is Moombahton, a new electrohouse-reggaeton fusion-genre which emerged in 2010. Defined by the reggaeton-style beat and the typical 108 BPM tempo. http://jamhouseblog.com/what-is-moombahton/ http://arntrela.com/post/2682136546/moombahton Other songs in this genre by affiliated artists would include Porter Robinson - 100% In the Bitch, Knife Party & Skrillex - Zoology, Knife Party - Until They Kick Us Out

Electronica and Not gay

Electronica should be there because on his solo album Gypsyhook EP, and also in his Skrillex albums, also his tweets were a joke he's not gay 81.97.130.173 (talk) 16:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)ericdeaththe2nd81.97.130.173 (talk) 16:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Occupation Citation/Correction Needed

The occupation section lists "guitarist" as an occupation for Sonny Moore. I cannot find any evidence of him being a guitarist as an occupation. I managed to find one clip that showed him at a Korn show playing guitar for 40 seconds. I don't think that really qualifies as an occupation. I think that this either needs to be properly cited, or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrabsAreMySpecialty (talk • contribs) 16:21, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Name of page

The name of this page is Skrillex and Sonny Moore gets redirected here. However, I think that should be reversed. The page should be Sonny Moore, with Skrillex redirecting there. The first line should be "Sonny John Moore, stage name Skrillex, ...." or something along those lines. I feel the page should be predominantly him rather than his stage persona. If his work was only under Skrillex I would find it reasonable. However, he also had a career with From First to Last. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.151.18.33 (talk) 19:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Discography Update

Under the discography section shouldn't his Collaboration with KoRn on their album, The Path of Totality, be included being as he was in three songs from that album, not to mention all three songs he was on were released as singles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.224.33.43 (talk) 07:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 May 2012

please remove Dubstep from Skrillex's genres. Skrillex has never made a dubstep song and many people are confused because many people think his songs are dubstep when they are not.

Maddog Six (talk) 14:52, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

This has been discussed several times before, please see above. Individual editor's estimation of what counts as dubstep is not relevant, it's what the cites say. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:59, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Skrillex and Ellie Goulding

[Personal Life]

Since the beginning of 2012, Skrillex has been dating fellow artist and singer Ellie Goulding, who provided vocals for the track Summit for Skrillex's previous EP Bangarang.


M0nkeydump321 (talk) 00:10, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a cite where this can be verified? --Escape Orbit (Talk) 09:28, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mdann52 (talk) 15:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


I do! http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/skrillex-is-dating-ellie-goulding-20120215 http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/skrillex-is-dating-ellie-goulding-2012152 They've actually been dating since November 2012 and kept it underwraps. And Skrillex and Ellie let Nardwuar address them as a couple in this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqlW-tFHNbc&feature=player_detailpage#t=416s Let's get it in here so the world can see how cute they are! :) JBAnonymous (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Done: thank for your contribution :) — Deontalk 08:01, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

They actually just broke up, so yeah! That really sucks!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Life829 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

FFTL

In the photo, this is Travis Richter screaming, Sonny no have tatoos in the arms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chemikalero9 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 22 August 2012

Sonny's middle name is wrong, his middle name is Jonathan, you have it listed shortened as John, there shouldn't be an h in it.

source: http://sonjonm.livejournal.com/ in his old live journal, second paragraph he states his full name. Skrylaxthefish (talk) 00:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Livejournal, being a blog, is not a reliable source, and we'd need proof that this Livejournal page is really created by the person who claims to have created it. Anyone could create a page under his name. Nyttend (talk) 17:58, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Wreck-it Ralph

No mention of him prodocing music for the upcoming movie wreck-it ralph. it says so on the page for the movie so why not on skrillex's page http://www.nme.com/news/skrillex/64909 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.226.176 (talk) 13:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, he made one song for the movie, and makes tiny appearance in the film. The song is named "Bug Hunt" and Noisia remix will be released on soundtrack album. Oddly, the original mix doesn't seem to be on it. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/walt-disney-records-to-release-wreck-it-ralph-original-motion-picture-soundtrack-on-october-30-2012-174647171.html 88.115.68.182 (talk) 17:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Correction: November, not February

In Personal Life it says he's been dating Ellie Goulding since February, but he's been dating her since November 2011.

Suggest changing it to: "In February it was confirmed that Skrillex has been dating fellow artist and singer, Ellie Goulding, who provided vocals for the Skrillex track "Summit", featured on the EP Bangarang. A source told US Weekly the couple have been dating since November 2011. Uploaded to YouTube in August, Nardwuar openly addressed the couple as an item during 'Nardwuar Vs Skrillex'."

http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/skrillex-is-dating-ellie-goulding-2012152 http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/skrillex-is-dating-ellie-goulding-20120215 http://www.spinner.com/2012/02/15/skrillex-ellie-goulding-dating/

Nardwuar Vs Skrillex (at the exact point): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqlW-tFHNbc&feature=player_detailpage#t=423s

I include Nardwuar because it's the first solid professional confirmation of their relationship made public through an interview with them, besides a fan-uploaded video in which Skrillex says Ellie is his girlfriend. Also, I suggest giving Personal Life its own category instead of making it a sub-category of Influences. But anyway, it should be November, not February. Cheers!JBAnonymous (talk) 18:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Addition again of "Brostep"

I've reverted again the addition of "Brostep" as a genre on this article. Could Antiaverage please discuss. See the previous discussion above. My point remains the same. In the cites that mention Skrillex as being "Brostep", they invariably distance themselves from what is a disparaging description. This is not enough for Wikipedia to categorise it as being his genre, any more than if a dozen references were found describing Skrillex as "crap" justifies adding that as a genre.

To examine the sources offered in detail;

  • The first source explains that Skrillex' music has "picked up the (fairly pejorative) label "brostep"", - distancing itself from the pejorative description and not making any claim to it being a genre.
  • The second source cited describes Skrillex as ; "the poster boy of brostep himself, and arguably one of today's least intellectual artists" - hardly a neutral opinion or any attempt at being factual.
  • The third source cited mention of brostep goes ; "their brand of dance music called dubstep or, more cynically, "brostep," - clearly distancing itself from a description it regards as synonymous with dubstep, and labelling it "cynical". Again, not a factual or neutral categorisation.
  • The fourth source states that dubstep is "now called “brostep” in some circles" - note that the source isn't calling it brostep, "some circles" are. More distancing from the description.

So I ask that if this is to be a genre for Skrillex, a reliable source is provided that factually and directly describes him as such, without the distancing, and without being snide. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:34, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree completely. I doubt such a reliable and factual source exists, since the term Brostep is a bit cynical by definition. Brostep does not deserve a spot in the infobox. I think there are enough references here to make it clear that Brostep and Skrillex do have a connection, however. Being referred to as the "poster boy" of this movement (whether or not the statement carries some cynicism) demonstrates the significance of the connection. Maybe just a single sentence in the article will suffice? Possibly even a direct quote from the reference I was just talking about. But certainly not inclusion in the infobox. --♪ ChrisBkoolio ... (Talk) 22:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
No problem with that, if reliable sources discuss references to Skrillex as 'Brostep'. But it's not really notable to say that some people do not like this music, even if they have gone as far to give it a name. Every type of music is disliked by someone. And there are many disparaging names coined for certain types of music, that doesn't necessarily make them suitable and neutral content worth including in the article (e.g. "elevator music", "dad-rock", "plastic pop"). We should need something more significant than that for inclusion. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 01:12, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

More brostep nonsense. Regarding these cites;

  • This cite says "one EDM sub-genre in particular, dubstep, and specifically its more aggressive, less nuanced form often termed ‘brostep’ (aka dumb-step)" This is just abuse and in no way a serious attempt to define Skrillex .
  • This cite refers to Skrillex as "the brostep leviathan" (that is "a monster"). Again, hardly a serious attempt at categorising Skrillex .

Again, to make it clear, just because you can find sources that describe someone's music as crap does not mean you can define their genre as crap. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I've reverted these additions, since those who added them didn't choose to explain why consensus should change to include them, or address my above points. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:23, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
And what the Dubstep article says is equally misguided. It uses two of the above cites to demonstrate that Skrillex plays "brostep". See above for my reasoning why these cites are not suitable to assign a genre to Skrillex. At best the Dubstep article discusses a sub-genre that some disparagingly call "brostep". --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:43, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

We really need to edit or delete this section: Brostep and American developments -- It is causing major confusion and it is misleading. Mattjsrules (talk) 00:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I totally agree. The sources provided aren't sufficient, and Skrillex himself doesn't use the term. We should get rid of it altogether before the horrible term gets too widely recognized.DJUnBalanced (talk) 10:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't know what world you're living in if you think "brostep" isn't widely recognized. "Brostep" was used widely over a year ago if not more. Charles35 (talk) 04:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm fine with it being mentioned on the Dubstep article. I'm even fine with it being on this article, if it is properly sourced and mentions that the term is usually used disparagingly. What I do not agree with is it being used as a genre when that is not what it is or how the word is used. It only becomes this when commentators use it as a serious attempt to classify the music of certain artists, rather than simply insulting them. I don't see this happening anywhere with "brostep". --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:06, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Escape Orbit, I understand this point, I really do. But it's not just that people use the term in order to mock mid-range cack. People also use the term to differentiate and create distance between the cack and the real dubstep. The "real" dubstep community, and the artists themselves, want to be recognized as separate from the consumer popstep. Sure, it is somewhat of a mockery, but it comes more so from a desire to make the real stuff more popular. They want people to realize that there is a deeper and more authentic type of music and community. And most of all, they want to increase their own record sales! Charles35 (talk) 04:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

As the term Brostep is now used and recognised by so called 'Brostep' artists I cannot understand how "We should get rid of it altogether before the horrible term gets too widely recognized." can be a good reason for removing the Brostep genre from the genres. Dubstep is a musical genre which has irregular bass and came from 2 step garage which is a musical genre that includes irregular beats. Skrillex music contains neither irregular bass or irregular beats so he cannot be either of them as that makes no sense whatsoever, which is where the coining of the new genre 'Brostep' came about for irregular higher pitched sounds that dont focus on bass or beat but are influenced by both genres. Also since it is also very popular and notable now, it needs its own article in comparison to how Dubstep has its own article from 2-step Garage and Future Garage has its own article from Dubstep.

Also, Wikipedias description of the genre Dubstep is incredibly amatuerish, it provides no descriptions whatsoever in the opening section except that it is electric and an extremely unspecific and undescriptive explanation cited from Allmusic, with a few sentences explaining the drums. It makes no mention of irregular bass which is what the whole genre is all about. It also describes Brostep as "Heavy metal influenced" which doesnt make any sense as it has no metal riffs and it also has no source. It also does not explain how the genre came about as a negative reaction to the 4/4 bass which is very popular in dance music. I also find the description for the Brostep section to have far too much writing about criticism and not much about the sound as well, and I have no idea what the metalstep part is on about.

At the moment I dont have much time for editing since I am very sick but when I am back I would like to some serious editing to these two articles since I dont feel they are up to a very good standard.

Since one of the above users asked for non-negative usages of the term Brostep I found a few after a quick search that describe Skrillex as Brostep.

BumFodder (talk) 01:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

As I said above, just because you can find a few sources describing the music as "brostep" does not make "brostep" a genre. I also note that despite pleas for you to stop and discuss this in an attempt to reach consensus, you have again stuck it back into the article. This is called edit warring and is going to get you blocked. As for your links ;
  • First one talks of "boilerplate bro-step wobble". A neutral genre categorisation? I think not.
  • The second refers to "hyper-aggressive, Americanized, tyrannosaurus-holocaust wub wub wub of popular brostep" and "something that sounded not unlike a computer logging onto AOL in the ’90s," Neutral? Are you joking?
  • The third and fourth is nearer the mark, but equally refers to Skrillex as dubstep. Certainly not convincing evidence it is a genre.
Above you claim that "the term Brostep is now used and recognised by so called 'Brostep' artists" but can't produce any examples of that. Why is that? --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:07, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
BumFodder has declined to revert his edit, so I have done it for him. Since he is over 3RR already, repeated addition of this without consensus will result in a block. The point of discussion is to attempt to reach consensus, then if the addition is agreed it can be added. It is not to give you time to repeatedly force it into the article until you get your way. If BumFodder believes that "brostep" is a genre that is deserving of its own article then perhaps his attention would be best devoted to doing this first. If this is possible it would go a long way to demonstrate that it is a genre. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

If youre going to claim that these two genres are somehow the same despite them being nothing alike, being completely different scenes and being recognised by each scene that they are seperate, while dismissing every source as "Unconvincing", I cant really prove it then as you are being completely unreasonable. I can list a few more sources for you to judge if you want though.

http://consequenceofsound.net/2013/01/hashtag-pop-taylor-swift-i-knew-you-were-trouble/

Very neutral source

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/datsik-delivers-an-unsurprising-dubstep-onslaught-at-930-club/2013/01/14/0a3067fa-5e5d-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html

Explains how brostep is the description for a new genre

http://www.spin.com/articles/skrillex-headline-sonar-barcelona-2013-controversy

Not neutral but recognises the differences between Brostep and Future Garage

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/music/2013/02/02/ben_rayners_reasons_to_live_for_feb_2.html

Review using the term Brostep

http://timeoutchicago.com/music-nightlife/music/15992356/hundred-waters-at-lincoln-hall-concert-preview

Compares the artists music to the majority of music on the albel which is described as Brostep

http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/countygrind/2013/01/in_progress_g-eazy_at_revoluti.php

Uses Brostep as a description

BumFodder (talk) 04:01, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I am not dismissing them as unconvincing. I'm dismissing them as not saying what you claim they say. They do not establish brostep is an genre because they all, without fail, use the term as criticism. Neither do they establish that Skrillex plays this style of music, for the same reasons.
As for your more recent crop. Really? Is this still the best you have?
  • First link; a mention of a "Skrillex-sized drop" in someone else's recording, which is then later described as a "brostep drop". And you're using this fourth-hand passing reference to determine Skrillex's entire genre?
  • Second link; Skrillex not even mentioned.
  • Third link; describes Skrillex "escaping brostep's clutches". So how is that saying he plays brostep exactly? Sounds more like he doesn't play it.
  • Fourth link; talks about "brostep" in quotation marks, like it's not even a word. And again no mention of Skrillex.
  • Fifth link; explains how another act doesn't sound like brostep. And additionally that they toured with Skrillex. So another third-hand passing reference use to determine something not discussed in the source.
  • Sixth link; no mention of brostep I can find. No mention of Skrillex. What does this show?
Whether combining these sources demonstrates (in your opinion) your argument is irrelevant. Combining sources is original synthesis and not permitted on Wikipedia. You need a good reliable source that says "Skrillex plays brostep, an offshoot of dubstep", or words to that effect. Despite all your claims to the contrary you still don't have that. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:34, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Moombahcore

You should add Moombahcore to the genres. Slicezor (talk) 12:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

That's a sub-genre, according to its article, not a genre. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:59, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, according to its article it's a sub-genre of electronic dance music. Dubstep would also be a sub-genre of EDM. Your argument is invalid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.27.158.94 (talk) 05:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

we need a criticism section.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/sep/29/skrillex-dubstep-interview

http://www.thelantern.com/a-e/commentary-dubstep-snobs-should-drop-it-about-skrillex-1.2788642#.URLvdugyHWY

http://www.spinner.com/2013/01/03/skrillex-leaving-new-song/

http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/crossfade/2011/07/12th_planet_interview_dubstep_brostep_skrillex_is_the_future.php


....just to name a few. I hope this can become a collaborative effort. Charles35 (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

This talk page consists of ~90% discussion of the genre, with the same editor or two defending Skrillex as dubstep. I do understand their position, as "that is what the sources say", but I think that if we actually look for new sources, we will be able to verifiably cite Skrillex's genre as "brostep". We should also describe all of the criticism again him - consumer dubstep, ruining the genre, selling out, mid-range "cack", "screaming in your face for an hour" (-Rusko), etc etc etc. Anyone in the dubstep community will tell you he isn't real dubstep. We just need to find the right sources! Please do what you can to help! Charles35 (talk) 00:25, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The cites you have added have already been discussed and dismissed above on this talk page. Please revert your changes and read what is said above. If you disagree with their evaluation then please explain why. Are you seriously removing a cited mention on Billboard magazine, for two trivial mentions in other minor magazines? Seriously??
What did you have in mind for the criticism section? It is not really notable that some people don't like Skrillex. Every band has its haters, no one cares. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 00:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
The 4 articles I linked to above also consider him "brostep". Criticism against Skrillex is very, very notable. It is one of the most prominent ideas to emerge from the dubstep community. Proportionally speaking, Skrillex has many more haters than any other artist I can think of. In fact, the second most hated dubstep artist is probably Doctor P, but I wouldn't consider that notable for wikipedia's standards (or him, in all honestly). Both Rusko and Skream have commented on brostep, explicitly naming Skrillex, and it is a very very well known evaluation of Skrillex. Charles35 (talk) 00:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Genre - dubstep, brostep, or both?

If you have "new" sources that honestly describe Skrillex's genre as "brostep" then we have something to work with. However, criticism of his music, describing it as "brostep" is no different from criticism describing it as "crap". It doesn't make it a genre. People who hate an artist's music are not the ones that get to decide what to call it. Wikipedia has to be neutral. It is not here to reflect the opinions of some unspecified "dubstep community" about what is "real" dubstep. Starting point is what do reliable sources say. If Billboard says he's dubstep then he's dubstep. Unless you can find a very good authoritative source that is better than Billboard?
As far as a criticism section is concerned, you need more than hearsay about what is "a very very well known evaluation", and that you think he is the most hated. You need sources that are more than just a couple of guy's opinions. Every artist is disliked by somebody. That doesn't mean Wikipedia should reflect that. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 00:41, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Skrillex is disliked more than anyone else though. I'm not saying, "hey, I think Skrillex is disliked more than everyone else, so let's add it to the article". What I am saying right now is just a discussion of the context for which we should be editing and looking for sources. Jeez. Everywhere I go on wikipedia people take every word you say to be some sort of a "claim" of my "personal opinion" independent of "reliable sources" that I am trying to "add to the article" and that I "need a reliable source in order to do so". Don't fret. We'll get there. Charles35 (talk) 00:45, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Brostep is a distinct genre, with the most obvious difference being the use of "mid-range cack" over sub-bass. What would make it a genre? In case you didn't know, genres themselves are poorly defined, and there is no "International Committee of Genres". They are defined by the community of artists and fans. The Guardian is more reliable and authoritative than Billboard, and Spinner and miamitimesnews are probably on the same level of reilableness. Now, this is mostly just my take on it. I am trying to contextualize the current state of affairs for you as it appears that you are not very familiar with dubstep. I've already found a few, but I'm going to look for more sources. If you feel like looking too, that would be great! Charles35 (talk) 00:53, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
And btw, the consensus on this talk page seems to be somewhere around 30-1 that Skrillex is not real dubstep. Charles35 (talk) 00:56, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Brostep seems to more be derived from both Dubstep and 2-step Garage while not being either, like how Dub is derived from Reggae. While it does not have the irregular rythmn of 2-step or the irregular bass of Dubstep, it is clearly derived from the irregular influences of them both. To say Brostep is Dubstep is to say that Reggae is the same as Dub, Jungle/Drum and bass, Rocksteady, Dancehall and Ragga. BumFodder (talk) 04:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
While I do enjoy a good EDM genre theorizing sesh every now and then :) , I created this section mostly so that we can focus on reporting the vast criticism leveled at Skrillex. I'm afraid that theorizing between the differences in genres might lead us too far off topic and we'll get lost. What we need to do IMO is compile sources that A) say that Skrillex makes brostep, not dubstep, and B) criticize Skrillex for his impact on dubstep. Charles35 (talk) 04:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Skrillex is a dubstep artist. Why should you make the call for what genre his music is? Skrillex says he is a dubstep artist.
Why are people still trying to change this? Stop changing the genre on his page. Mattjsrules (talk) 00:59, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Does Skrillex music generally contain irregular bass? It doesnt. Can you clarify how he is a Dubstep artist more than a Brostep artist then? Im pretty sure there are no other more important characteristics of the genre than that and there are an abundancy of sources saying he is not Dubstep and that he is Brostep. What Skrillex calls himself is of no importance compared to the characteristics of the genre and reliable sources so you cannot change it back just because you dislike it.

He has made Future Garage though, which is why the Dubstep label is still there. BumFodder (talk) 01:17, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Mattjsrules: I am reporting the genre that sources use to describe his music. If you didn't notice, before you deleted "Brostep", there were two citations to support it. Furthermore, there were zero citations to support "Dubstep". And even furthermore, the page listed both "Brostep" and "Dubstep" as his genres. This is my solution to the issue: there is a lot of controversy on this talk page about whether he's brostep or dubstep. So, I included both of them in the genre listing. There. Everybody's happy.
Satisfied? Do you have a problem with that? Charles35 (talk) 03:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Charles35, this is your last chance to revert the edit as I requested before I report both you and BumFodder for edit warring. Guidelines are quite clear about these edits; if they are reverted when added then you discuss. You do not keep putting them back in on the grounds that they're being discussed.
If you believe that brostep is a genre, and that Skrillex plays brostep, it is up to you to gain consensus and gather cites for the change. Before changing it, not afterwards.
It is not true that dubstep was not cited. There was a cite there to Billboard, remember? Right before you removed it. So you have removed a cite to a good reliable source (Billboard) and replaced it with two shoddy cites that no-one has bothered to defend in my criticism of them above. All because you, personally, didn't agree with what the reliable source said.
Your, and BumFodder's estimation of what is, and isn't, dubstep is completely irrelevant. No-one cares what your, or any other Wikipedia editor's opinion is. It wouldn't matter if a thousand editors came here with their opinion of what Skrillex is. What matters is what reliable sources say.
I've been very patient about this. Revert, and then present your case (with sources), or be reported. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Its nothing to do with what we think is Dubstep and what is not, its about what other people think is Dubstep in both the Dubstep and Brostep scenes and what makes one genre. Brostep and its citations were up there, and now youre asking for sources which were cited before they were gotten rid of and completely ignored the large list I put down under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Skrillex#Addition_again_of_.22Brostep.22 . As proof of the discussion going somewhere, I conceded that the Dubstep genre should remain as he has done a Future Garage EP that was more notable than usual.
Youre not acting as some kind of mediator if that is what you think you are doing, you are just interfering with the discussion. I was going to discuss it with the other two but matt has not replied and now you come in and accuse us of this and that. If youre not going to discuss it then keep out. BumFodder (talk) 00:20, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
If you read it, you'll see I replied previously to your collection of links. The same way I summarised the last list of links that were added as cites. They are all unsuitable; they don't say what is claimed, don't discuss Skrillex, or don't categorise Skrillex. None are of the quality that calls his "dubstep". I'm still waiting for anyone to defend any of them as suitable. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, our opinions on the matter are irrelevant, but our opinions on the policies are completely relevant. Go edit the page, no one's stopping you. I didn't violate 3RR, and I've made like 2 edits to this article total (not counting back-to-backs). I haven't even touched the article in like 3 days, so please do not threaten me or try to jerk me around with reporting me for edit warring. I'm not stopping you from editing the article. I haven't even made a single revert. And I never said "please leave it while we discuss on talk page", that was somebody else. Threatening people for edit warring is not helping keeping things civil, and is only going to turn people off from trying to work with you.
Go change it back. Do it. I'm not changing something just because you say so. I'm not going to stop you from changing it though, and I'm not going to revert you if you do so. Charles35 (talk) 23:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
I asked you to demonstrate your willingness to discuss by reverting your edit, which was a repeat of what others had done and was a matter that was already being discussed on the talk page. You declined, and continued to implement your preferred change, including removing reliably sourced material. That is not "working with people". I've also asked you a number of times to reply to the criticisms I have put about the cites you added. Again, nothing. Instead you have insisted that what you are doing is consistent with the views of some undefined "dubstep community" and "other people", but can't back any of that up with sources. No-one is interest in what you think, or what you think other people think. Show us the sources. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
You asked me to provide a citation, so that's what I did? Cry me a river. I don't recall removing a reliable source. That must have been an accident. I have replied to your criticisms, unless there's something I missed... No, the "dubstep community" was not a claim for what we should add to the article. I was just saying that to give you some context for searching for sources. Quite frankly, I thought you were going to look for sources about it as well. You're throwing up a straw man. Charles35 (talk) 23:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
By the way, what ever Skrillex calls his music is completely irrelevant to wikipedia. Donald Trump will tell you that he's a bona fide business man, but that doesn't mean we say so on wikipedia. We write things about people that they don't like all the time. That's why wikipedia policy addresses legal threats and why one essay recommends that you do not try to create an article about yourself - because wikipedia will report both the good and the bad about you. Please also see WP:CRYBLP. Calling an artist "brostep" is hardly contentious.
I didn't mean to remove the Billboard citation. I thought that I had moved it to after "dubstep" in a separate edit because someone had put it after brostep, but I guess I was mistaken. I still do not understand what is wrong with the other two sources. They both call it brostep. Yes, I do concede that many sources describe it as dubstep, which is why I suggest we include both. Sources disagree on things all the time. That doesn't mean that one of them is "wrong". We simply report both in this situation. Charles35 (talk) 03:25, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Wrong. What Skrillex calls his music his far more relevant that what you say it is. (And you'll find that Donald Trump is a "business magnate") It is not up to Wikipedia editors to tell them they're wrong. Obviously if someone self-identification is completely at odds with the facts, we have a problem. But in this case, a lot of reliable sources agree. It is not up to Wikipedia to put them all right just because some editor has knows thinks they know "the truth".
Your point about the WP:CRYBLP essay is a red-herring. It deals with contentious facts, not contentious opinion. Most of the sources you've produced make it clear that they, or others, are using the term to denigrate, not categorise. So it is not a genre. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Key word: "most" - "Most of the sources you've produced..." Charles35 (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
What Skrillex calls his music his far more relevant that what you say it is. - sneaky and fallacious straw man argument right here. I didn't say that Skrillex's opinion is less relevant than my opinion. I said that it is simply irrelevant. We don't report self-published material and present it as fact. If Skrillex calls himself dubstep, the best we can do is say something like "Skrillex calls his music dubstep". We want independent, third party sources. It's the same thing as citing an advertisement. Imagine if someone wrote "anyone who switches to Geico will save 15% on their car insurance" in the Geico article because "the commercial says so". Charles35 (talk) 23:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Fortunately we have an excellent cite from Billboard that says exactly that. So your point is moot. See also WP:SELFSOURCE, as you seem to be unclear on what an article subject can self-identify as. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

ANOTHER SOURCE - Skrillex is the first artist listed and has more "tags" than any other artist. [last.fm] is one of, if not the, most popular music sites on the web. It has an entire page dedicated to brostep, calling it "a relatively new and controversial sub-genre of music born out of Dubstep. Unlike Dubstep where sub bass is key, Brostep places more emphasis on ratty high frequency samples with the specific mid-range wobble bass". This is a good source in my opinion, not to make opinionated claims, but to report substantial, factual material about the world. We obviously can't use the source to say something like "critics say that Skrillex...", but we could say something like "the term is growing more widespread among the EDM community, and is being applied artists like Skrillex." It is not simply a single author's opinion from an online magazine, it is the opinion of the entire community of music listeners. If they say it's a genre, it's a genre. Skrillex's opinion should not be used in this article except in the case of "Skrillex describes his music as dubstep". Charles35 (talk) 03:30, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

That is a user generated website and that page represents the opinion of less than 481 anonymous persons. Get 20 people to tag Skrillex easy-listening and it would also say he was easy-listening. Get one person to edit the brostep page and could also say it Mozart invented it. That is why it is not a reliable source. (In fact, if you look at how Skrillex has been tagged, what word stands out in the cloud? Dubstep maybe?) --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
My understanding is that brostep is a sub-genre of dubstep and that the title is not as popular as dubstep. The main reason I don't agree with listing dubstep, is because all of his album pages list the release as dubstep. There is not a single mention of brostep on any of his album pages. We should not include genres on his main page that are not listed on his album pages. I'm not calling anyone an idiot or trying to start a war. I just want his page to be accurate. Mattjsrules (talk) 07:56, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't think that's a very strong argument - it just means that the album pages are incomplete. Shall we add brostep to the genre on the album pages? Charles35 (talk) 08:20, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Add what reliable sources say about the albums. Again, I'm asking you to create a Brostep page if you are convinced you can demonstrate it is a genre. Then you might have a case for adding it as a genre. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Now you guys are starting a trolling war. Why add it to the album pages just because you want to? You can search through the Internet and the albums are categorized as dubstep. Stop whining about what genres should be listed. Mattjsrules (talk) 01:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I am at a loss as to how any part of this conversation is trolling. There is already a section about brostep on the dubstep page. [[brostep]] redirects there. The genre's existence has been demonstrated using reliable sources. It doesn't need to have it's own page in order to be a valid genre. Plenty of genres exist simply as a section, or in some cases, even less, such as this section of the drum and bass article, which lists 15 distinct sub-genres. Various artists on wikipedia have those genres listed. In Excision's article, "drumstep" is listed as a genre. If you follow that link, you will see that there is no page for "drumstep", and that it only has a single sentence describing it.
These reliable sources that I've provided consider Skrillex to be a brostep artist. It doesn't matter what is going on at other articles. They may be inaccurate, they may not be inaccurate. There is no policy saying that an artist's genre must add up to the genres of his album's pages. If the reliable sources say he's brostep, he's brostep. And remember that reliable sources disagree and/or contradict each other all the time. That doesn't mean one is "wrong" and shouldn't be included. It just means that we report both. Note that brostep and dubstep aren't mutually exclusive. Someone can make both, just like someone can make both techno and house music at the same time. Some reliable sources consider him dubstep, some consider him brostep, and some consider him both. Therefore, we have the responsibility to report all of these views. Charles35 (talk) 23:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I understand your point. The brostep section on the dubstep page needs to be rewritten in my opinion to better describe exactly what it is. Brostep being on the same page as dubstep means it's being classified as a sub-genre. What's wrong with only having the term "dubstep"? This page has not had brostep listed until December of 2012 which it then went into conflict. Everything was fine before that and there wasn't a problem about it. I'm not trying to be ugly or start a war with anyone. I just want to keep the discussion going to see what's best. Mattjsrules (talk) 01:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Yeah but Dubstep is about irregular bass, Brostep isnt. I dont see how it can be listed under Dubstep when it clearly isnt. We have sources identifying them as different things and describing them in different ways, I dont see how this is not a case for making it being a different genre. Future Garage is about irregular bass yet it is listed as a different genre than Dubstep and not a sub-genre. For example Burial has Future Garage and Dubstep listed as seperate genres on his page despite all Future Garage having the irregular bass of Dubstep. If Brostep does not have irregular bass then how can Brostep be a sub-genre of Dubstep and not be listed seperately while Future Garage is? If you do try to argue that they share irregularity in common, so does 2-Step Garage, which Dubstep is derived from, yet they are listed as seperate genres and 2-step Garage commonly has irregular bass too, and Future Garage always does. If these two genres share more in common with Dubstep and are more closely related while still being different genres on Wikipedia, then how can Brostep be a sub-genre of Dubstep on the Dubstep page while Future Garage isnt, and why isnt Dubstep on the 2-Step Garage page?

I really want to know what you think, since we do have a lot of sources identifying them as different genres so I do not see the case for them sharing the same page when they share little in common, especially compared to other genres. We can easily move the Brostep part to its own article and improve it, which it desperately needs as it is not getting any attention on the Dubstep page. We have sources describing them differently and more can be found so I dont think that will be a problem. BumFodder (talk) 02:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what irregular bass means so I can't really comment on any of this, bumfodder. But nonetheless, I don't think the arguments against the use of brostep as a genre are very strong. Can we rethink this in order to make a consensus? I am willing to concede that dubstep is a more common term, and that we can list it here before brostep. Does that work for everyone? Would you guys be satisfied with that solution? Charles35 (talk) 02:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I meant irregular bass as in Dubstep was made as a backlash to the more generic 4/4 bass dance music. The bass can be all over the place in some songs or just moves a lot, but it has to be bass. The thing with Brostep is that it is irregular but does not contain irregular bass, which is what Dubstep is all about. 2-step Garage and Future Garage are also both about irregular music, 2-step is about irregular rhythms and Future Garage is also about irregular bass. Im saying that I cant see why the genres would be arranged in such a weird way that makes no sense on Wikipedia, and so that Brostep makes no sense whatsoever as a sub-genre of Dubstep if these are all seperate genres.
Also I meant irregular bass as in this for example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gN9mw6C7MbI The bass is moving up and down at its own discretion. It doesnt necessarily have to be irregular like this though. BumFodder (talk) 03:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I've never heard the term. I would use the word breakbeat to describe that. Dubstep also uses a 4/4 time signature, technically. Props on the Coki though! :) I'd love to see some more DMZ and Deep Medi on here and less bro. Charles35 (talk) 04:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
In any case, the two genres are not mutually exclusive. We are allowed to report both. Some reliable sources describe Skrillex as a brostep artist (some are not even mocking!). There is no rule that says the genre of an artist must align with the genre of that artist's albums. There is no rule saying that an artist's genre must have its own page. Thus, can we compromise and come to a consensus that brostep be listed after dubstep? Ideas? Charles35 (talk) 04:46, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I think it should be added if we can find enough reliable sources that aren't mocking the artist. I have seen many articles using the term brostep as a joke. I guess after the whole discussion I have changed my mind. Mattjsrules (talk) 12:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't see what's wrong with LastFM to be honest. Charles35 (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I think LastFm has the most accurate description Ive seen in a source so far of Brostep, it would be a shame if we couldnt use it. BumFodder (talk) 16:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
As I said above, it is a user-generated webpage and therefore not an acceptable source. See WP:USERGENERATED.--Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:14, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The problem is, Charles35, is that you keep referring to reliable sources, and keep saying that you are willing to discuss, yet I can't see anywhere on this page where you respond when I have criticized the suggested cites. If you can't produce a cite that clearly says "Skrillex plays brostep" without it being mocking, or distancing itself from the claim, or being some tenuous third-party passing mention of no significance, I don't know why you think anyone should take it seriously. Simply by repeatedly calling them reliable sources doesn't make them suitable sources and doesn't address the problems I have identified with them. Please either respond to what I have already said about the cite you want to use, explaining why I am mistaken, or produce a better one. Until you do this you cannot claim to have consensus, because you have not identified what your change would be verified by. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

There were definitely some there that called him Brostep without being insulting, Im just going to look through them in a minute. BumFodder (talk) 22:40, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

If there's something I haven't responded to, it means that you're right. Plain and simple. I don't claim to have consensus, I am asking if we can come to one. I don't agree with some of your views on sources in general and what makes a source appropriate or not, but I do agree with you that none of the sources identified so far are adequate. I can't seem to find any others.

However, more specifically, what I mean to say is that none of these sources are adequate for making the claim that Skrillex is a brostep artist. But they are certainly adequate for criticizing him. Charles35 (talk) 05:36, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. So we are in agreement. Do you not think that the difficulty in findings sources that say what you want them to say is indication of anything? There are plenty of places you'll find Skrillex and brostep mentioned together, but they do not meet any kind of definition of being a reliable source making a genuine attempt to neutrally categorise him.
Just also to say, I'm not against you including well sourced content about Skrillex being criticised, or even described by some as "brostep", as clearly this is notable. But these are only opinions, and shouldn't be included in the factual info box or lead. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:05, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I mean, I think the LastFM source is a serious attempt at defining his music, but I understand why it is not a great source to use. However, I do disagree with the policy and think that it should be something we can use. But nonetheless, I know that my opinion on the policy obviously does not override it.
Even if the term is used mockingly, it is still meant to highlight the difference between his music and that of other dubstep musicians. It is still a separate genre. Just because they're being critical doesn't mean they're just talking nonsense. Charles35 (talk) 15:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I find it hard to find good sources for music related articles, so Im not sure where to start to be honest. BumFodder (talk) 00:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Ive found a few sources, feel free to say which you think may or may not be appropriate.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/soundof/2012/artists/skrillex/#p00mybws

"His hyperactive, no holds barred combination of dubstep, hardcore and noise (sometimes referred to as 'brostep')"


http://exclaim.ca/News/skrillex_details_soundtrack_for_harmony_korines_spring_breakers

"Last year, bespectacled brostep king Skrillex confirmed that he would be scoring Harmony Korine's Spring Breakers"


http://www.heyreverb.com/blog/2013/02/14/deadmau5-hates-kanye-west-edm/62043/

"“Skrillex… took this brostep thing and really commercialized it,”"


http://theweek.com/article/index/239385/5-crazy-adorable-grandparent-reactions-to-things-young-people-like

"A concerned young man has his grandparents listen to Skrillex, Pied Piper of Bro-step, and records their reactions on video. Naturally, gramps has a few questions:"

BumFodder (talk) 00:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for these. To break them down;
--Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:49, 23 February 2013 (UTC)


I'd say brostep. What he's known for (that aggressive wubbling) isn't even similar to the defining early dubstep tapes. It's something that's been added later. To distinguish it from the earlier dubstep sound, I think we should say brostep. To get an idea of what "real" dubstep sounds like, check out artists like Skream, and Liquid Stranger. Dubstep is easily explained as electronic music with unusual beats, usually a 2/4 time signature, and deep wubbly bass. Skrillex's style is so influenced by other genres that calling it dubstep would be misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomebriks (talk • contribs) 08:40, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

should we put in an request for page protection?

This article seems to be vandalized 2-3 times per day. Does anyone agree or disagree with requesting semi-protection? Charles35 (talk) 23:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, we need protection. This page was protected in the past but it was removed for reasons I don't know why. Mattjsrules (talk) 01:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I just requested this page be put under indefinite semi-protection. Mattjsrules (talk) 01:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I think indefinite semi-protection would be for the best as Skrillex has large hatedom so I dont see the vandalism going away any time soon. BumFodder (talk) 02:30, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
The page is now protected for 1 year. =) Mattjsrules (talk) 21:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Skrillex is Fidget house

And stop removing the genre. I cited it as you may have seen, he himself claims to be Fidget as well. Anyone who is familiar with the definition will tell you he is as well. All those vocals that are made electronically and not from an actual person epitomizes what Fidget house is. Other characteristics go with the fidget house genre as well, but first and foremost are those electronically produced vocals, which you hear in almost all his songs. I'm going to put it back now, don't remove it. Thank you

ErdoSa (talk) 19:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

"vocals made electronically and not from an actual person" do not epitomise what fidget is, the vocals used in fidget are usually heavily edited (chopped, and rhythmically arranged) made from samples of vocal recordings. To the WP:V point, the source you provided is an interview with him saying he thinks his music is "a mixture of dubstep, electro house and fidget" - firstly this does not mean his music is fidget house, secondly, not a reliable source (self published), and just like putting "Enya" under genres in the Enya article. There aren't many sources about fidget house (hence why it doesn't have it's own article any more) but I can assure you no one within the fidget house scene would consider Skrillex a fidget artist. filelakeshoe (talk) 19:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Ok so I defined Fidget house differently than what wikipedia says, but my point remains the same. NME is not self published, I don't know where you get that idea, they hire reporters just like a newspaper would, and is relatively reputable. Here's some actual self-published reports saying Skrillex is Fidget http://ukutabs.com/s/skrillex/ http://www.icangiveyouhouse.com/2010/11/16/just-the-way-skrillex-is/ . Also "I can assure you no one within the fidget house scene would consider Skrillex a fidget artist" - See Straw man fallacy. I have to wonder, why are you so against him being labeled in this genre? You seem personally vested ErdoSa (talk) 20:17, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
No, NME is not self-published, but all that article has is Skrillex himself saying "I think my music is a mix of elements from dubstep/electro house/fidget", which a) doesn't say he makes fidget house, and b) is essentially self-published, because he can say whatever he wants in interviews. I'm against him being labelled as fidget house because I know very well what fidget house is and Skrillex is not. I don't even know where he gets the idea he has elements of fidget in his music, unless the definition of fidget has been expanded to mean any bass driven house music. filelakeshoe (talk) 22:33, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I oppose the edit. View the "brostep" section on the talk page. Same thing applies here. Mattjsrules (talk) 00:49, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I have. No artist in the entirety of wikipedia will ever be labeled "brostep" in the genre category. It has an overwhelmingly negative connotation. Fidget house does not, it just helps the reader to get a better idea of the more specific genre of Skrillex. So no, the same thing does not apply, it is in fact entirely irrelevent. ErdoSa (talk) 03:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
To be fair, Fidget House is listed on the Electro House page, which is already listed as a genre. Mattjsrules (talk) 23:01, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Nine Inch Nails as a Skrillex influence

znaddanz (talk) 15:46, 18 April 2013 (AUS)

I'd like to suggest the following addition to section 2 'Influences':

Moore has stated in an online interview with Artist Direct that Nine Inch Nails was an early musical influence: "It's really funny. The Fixed EP was actually one of the first records I've ever owned, and it changed my life. It's all the remixes of Broken. I bought it at Wherehouse Music when I was like nine [Laughs]. I've been a huge Nine Inch Nails fan from that moment on."

Citation link: http://www.artistdirect.com/entertainment-news/article/nine-inch-nails-stories-and-favorites-from-peter-murphy-skrillex-slipknot-korn-the-dillinger-escape-plan-device-hollywood-undead-and-more/10446755#fzI1GFaUEux6tFFl.99

The page is locked but this would be an interesting addition, I think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Znaddanz (talk • contribs) 05:44, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Associated acts

The rapper Sirah is not linked, and appears only once in the page (under associated acts). The name of her individual Wiki page is Sirah_(rapper) and such a change should be made to the mainspace article to reflect this. --Kristofferus (talk) 17:42, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done Not sure if the article will last, though. Markus Shedletsky (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Add "(early)" to post-hardcore tag

Skrillex doesn't play post-hardcore anymore. I think we should write "post-hardcore (early)" in the genres, or else people might think his later electronic works are post-hardcore, too. Awesomebriks (talk) 09:12, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Archive 1Archive 2
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Skrillex/Archive_2&oldid=1137189750"