From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---

This article is a frequent source of heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here.

I had an idea and tired to do it, but i dont know all the wikipedia page editing jargon so maybe someone who knows how can do it. I tried to make all the bands we argue endlessly about on this page have an asterisk by there name and at the top of the page I wouldve put something like that "It is highly contested whether or not the bands marked with asterisks are actually emo". it seemed better than arguing over and over again.

Also, we dont need the panic at the disco subcategory since we cant even decide wether or not the band is actually emo.--67.65.248.142 20:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 == 1.1 Dashboard Confessional 1.2 MATCHBOOK ROMANCE 1.3 FALL OUT BOY 1.4 Bands That Don't Belong to Emo 1.5 Simple Plan 1.6 Why does Dashboard repeatedly get put back in this category? 1.7 Modern Bands Claiming to Be Emo 1.8 Story of the Year 1.9 Annoyed 1.10 Thursday 1.11 Clarify

[edit] ==

Is there a need to have list of emo bands, and list of early emo bands on two seperate pages?

Underoath is not emo.

Chipstick: You're right, there is no need - they should be merged.

You guys are out of your minds. You can't merge a Category with an article. You can add the groups in the early emo groups list to this category, but that's about it. And I think that's potentially a bad idea, given how many of those bands don't have actual articles. -- ChrisB 22:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Why not make a list of emo goups and merge early emo groups into it. St jimmy 13:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Cause we tried a list of emo bands (in two different forms) and it was nearly impossible to manage the list. There's no consensus as to which bands are actually emo, so we end up with people adding and removing bands like crazy. (Ie, some people think My Chemical Romance is emo, some insist they aren't.) It's not worth the stupid arguments over and over again. With a Category, the list includes only the bands that have consensus - ie, the editors of that band's article agree that the band is "emo". That makes it as accurate as it can possibly be. (And also stops people from adding their friend's band to the list.)

I don't have a problem with the early band list being its own entity. Many of those bands are not notable enough to have their own article, so they would otherwise be discounted from Wikipedia entirely. And the original emo scene was so removed from what's going on now that it doesn't seem fair to them to lump them in as "emo" in the modern sense. -- ChrisB 06:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

That makes sense, the only problem with having a category instead of an article. The only problem is that when some dumbass place Good Charlotte as an emo band, I can't change it.

[edit] Dashboard Confessional

why are they on the list? it's emotional HARDCORE.

no, i agree - Dashboard Confessional are definitely emo! Woodgreener 22:35, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MATCHBOOK ROMANCE

they are definitely emo lol.. why arent they here

add them then... by the way i think we can delete some of these. fall out boy and panic at the disco? they seem more like pop rock to me--Terronez 02:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FALL OUT BOY

They're not emo...--209.30.228.158 18:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Fall Out Boy is definitely not emo...they don't even fit the stereotype, much less the sound. A band is not emo because of its fans. 204.90.50.252 20:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Fall Out Boy are emo - their music fits the stereotype and they pretty much all "look emo". I think they should be added again Woodgreener 22:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The emo "stereotype" we use today really has nothing to do with emo. And emo is also not a look.

haha Fallout Boy emo...... in my opinion they're not and i've never heard anyone call them emo until i saw them on the article--HurricaneRo 00:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bands That Don't Belong to Emo

Bands that don't belong on this list:

Cursive, Dashboard Confessional, Fall Out Boy, Funeral For a Friend, Hawthorne Heights, Matchbox Romance, Saosin, Saves the Day, Silverstein, Starting Line, A Static Lullaby, Taking Back Sunday, The Used, Thursday, Sunny Day Real Estate

Sunny Day Real Estate was an indie rock band. They were not emo.

Note that emo is emotionally charged HARDCORE, not whiney pop-rock bands that attach themselves to corporate trends to make a quick buck.

Yes I agree, for the most part on those bands. But how do you add or remove things on this? (jesus I'm such a n00b)--Terronez 17:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea, I would have removed the bands myself instead of writing this if I did.

Dashboard Confessional, Fall Out Boy, Funeral For a Friend, Hawthorne Heights, Starting Line, Taking Back Sunday and The Used are all very emo bands (the others I have never heard of). They should be on the list of emo bands!

Thursday is Emo! anyway i cant be arsed to argue against people who want to talk about what is emo or not.If you want to think and argue that certain bands are emo, then fair enough but at the end of the day its only a label, and most of the bands you have mentioned are emo. 

though yeah i have to admit Good Charlotte and Simple Plan are definatly not emo,but Dashboard Confessional, Hawthorne Heights, Taking Back Sunday and The used defo are and probably the others, but you know who cares! - Rocker4Life

sunny day should be considered emo. they heavily drew influence by earlier emo bands, and then mixed it with a more indie tempo. The guitar work found in most emo music is still there as well as the delivery of the vocals. Also, "Phase four: "post-emo indie rock" and post-emo post-hardcore. Sunny Day Real Estate, Christie Front Drive, Promise Ring, Mineral, Boys Life, Sideshow, Get-Up Kids, Braid, Cap'n Jazz, then later Joan of Arc, Jets To Brazil, etc. Lots of Caulfield and Crank! Records bands, more lately a lot of stuff on Jade Tree for instance." -www.fourfa.com. Iii9ix3 02:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

omg Taking back sunnday-not emo haha..... This is from one of their songs " And u could slit my throat and with my one last gasping breath i'd apologize for bleeding on your shirt"sounds emo enought to me--HurricaneRo 00:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Fall Out Boy isnt emo and if they claim to be they are posers because emos dont tell everyone there emo. But TBS they are emo you lil jerks!

[edit] Simple Plan

Should Simple Plan be added? It's debated whether they are pop-punk, or emo. --Stonesour025 07:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

That is completely preposterous, Simple Plan are quite simply a pop-rock band. Not even pop-punk. They don't deserve to be associated with good pop-punk bands like the Ramones and the Queers.

  Where on earth would you get an idea like that?--Terronez 02:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Well some of their lyrics could be emo ..what about welcome to my life,untitled and Perfect??--HurricaneRo 00:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why does Dashboard repeatedly get put back in this category?

Dashboard Confessional is an acoustic pop-rock band.

Rites of Spring is an underground band inspired by the hardcore scene, but against the violence it caused in venues. They are heavy, raw, uncomprimising, and very punkish---but have deep, introverted lyrics. That is emo.

Dashboard is not inspired by the hardcore punk scene, they don't have a raw, uncompromising sound. They're not underground. In fact, they're worshipped by nearly every preppy, teenage girl in America who watches MTV. The whole cheerleading squad at my school listens to them. That's not underground. That's not punk, hardcore, or emo.

The simple facts are Dashboard Confessional:

1. Aren't emo.

2. Have nothing to do with emo.

There, [/rant].

hah.... have u heard screaming infedelities? or again i go unnoticed??? The lyrics are definitlety emo

[edit] Modern Bands Claiming to Be Emo

There are a lot of modern bands claiming to be emo. Most of these bands are mainstream pop-rock bands who all have essentially the same overall sound, mood, and theme in their music and lyrics. Another common factor in these bands is they all love to tour together, and they've all claimed to be (or associated themselves with) "hardcore", "punk", or "emo" at one point in time. This is inaccurate, seeing as how these bands are all mainstream, media-darlings. Their fans consist of teenage boys and girls, who usually know nothing about the original punk, hardcore, or emo scenes/bands. These fans also seem to have it in their head that these bands are somehow underground, despite their countless appearances on MTV, Rolling Stone, and chain stores like Hot Topic (whose company policy generally doesn't allow local or underground bands to advertise shows in the store). Another thing about these fans, they're all struck with faux-depression, acting out like their lives are horrible and that they know all about sorrow and loss, all for attention. These fans are typically skaters, preppy-abercrombie kids, cheerleaders, jocks, and kids who claim to be goth. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but this does NOT merit the new "emo" bands as being emo at all. Emo (as well as Hardcore and Punk) are underground, anti-establishment movements. Logically, this would make all the new wave "emo" bands and their sheep-like fans, to be the complete anti-thesis of what the movements truly stood for. These new bands with all the essentially same sound, don't have an uncompromising, raw sound. They have an over-produced, polished sound that sounds like if Britney Spears got a backing band pretending to be punk. These modern bands I refer to are:

My Chemical Romance, The Used, Fall Out Boy, Hawthorne Heights, Senses Fail, the Starting Line, Taking Back Sunday, Aiden, Dashboard Confessional, Thursday, Early November, etc. etc. etc.

These bands are not emo, punk, or hardcore. They're merely pop-rock. To associate them with anti-establishment, underground genres of rock music is completely, and utterly absurd and illogical as they are all clearly mainstream bands, who have fans who stand for everything anti-establishment and underground music are against. [/rant] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PopeMatthewPaul (talk • contribs) 16:59, 29 July 2006.

Wikipedia is founded on the principle of verifiable sources. Verifiable sources are calling those bands emo. Doesn't matter what anyone else (including the "purist") thinks. Wikipedia is here to reflect reality. And, as long as people are calling those bands emo, they're emo. End of story. -- ChrisB 17:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

First off, I second ChrisB's comment on this. Secondly, a musical genre like emo, punk or hardcore has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you are "underground", "scene", "mainstream" or any other tag you want to apply. If one of your approved emo bands like Rites of Spring would now be all over MTV, would their genre all of a sudden shift from emo to pop-rock? No, it would not. Please educate yourself on the topic of emo (might I suggest Emo (music) and Talk:Dashboard Confessional) before you vandalise articles and post rants on Wikipedia. This is not a forum. None of these bands are calling themselves emo, because nobody wants to be assoiciated with the negative connotations applied to the genre by people like yourself. They are labeled emo by (mainly self-proclaimed) so-called music experts and ignorant people would think emo is all about self-pity and slitting your wrists, and who consider "emo" an insult (as in "He's an emo!"). True, the new popular form of emo is way different from its roots, yet it still is a derivate, tracable to the original sound. If you disagree, maybe you should write a blog. --HarryCane 19:10, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

That's ridiculous saying a verifiable resource is someone calling a band emo. Would it be a verifiable resource if I called some random guy on the street Indonesian? No. Because that would be a statement made out of ignorance, I know nothing of this man or where he's from or what cultural background is. And how is it vandalization to speak my mind on a page for the discussion of this topic? I'm sorry if I don't have your opinion, Mr. Thought Police. I'm sorry if I don't follow what everyone else is told to believe. It's not that I'm a purist, I'm saying associating a corporate rock band like Taking Back Sunday with an incredible band like Rites of Spring is insulting towards the latter. Categorizing them together is absurd.

Explanation of "verifiable": WP:V

Example of verifiable source: [1]

We're not the ones categorizing those bands together as emo. Wikipedia cannot publish unsourced ideas. (See WP:OR.) Prominent (and verifiable) media sources are categorizing both bands as emo.

And this is not the correct place for this debate, given that bands cannot be added to this category via this page. -- ChrisB 04:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Since when Is Taking Back Sunday corporate rock? All of their album releases except the current one have been on an independent label. People get to me when there all puritan in the beliefs that only the first wave of Punk, or in your case emo, should EVER be classified as Punk. It's like saying that If you didn't record your record in 1976, in your basement, onto a crappy cassette tape, don't even bother.

And also, none of the bands you have mentioned are pop-rock. Pop-rock should be used to classify something such as The Beatles, or Michael Jackson. --DieHard2k5 | Talk 03:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Being underground really doesn't make a band emo or not, but I do agree that almost all of the mainstream bands claiming to be emo aren't.--Terronez 23:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow so being famous amkes them not emo...ridiculous... Every band wants to eventually become famous...i mean some do it as a hobby..but there dream is to become famous--HurricaneRo 00:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Story of the Year

Story of the Year is not emo. Their second album sounds nothing like My Chemical Romance or Hawthorne Heights.Theunknown42 21:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

too bad my chemical romance and hawthorne heights arent emo either.

A few MCR songs could be emo and Hawthorne heights is emo..well according to almost everyone in my school who doesnt listen to them becuz they say there emo..which is stupid...--HurricaneRo 00:46, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Annoyed

I do agree with all of you that most of the said bands up there aren't true Emo. But most are punk:Pop-Punk or Post-Hardcore. But still related to Emo distantly. I'm not saying that these bands should be on this page. But I would really appreaciate it if you stop bashing these bands just because they are popular(they all used to be underground anyway). It's not the bands themselves that are putting their names on the list. It's a random fan that doesn't know his or her musical history.

I don't know one of those bands that actually claim to be Emo, Emotional maybe...But not Emo the musical genre.

Btw...Someone put Hawthorne Heights on the page again.

And remember they are related to Punk...And don't cling, because true punk along with true emo..Is dead.

IAngelofFuryI 00:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thursday

Thursday is not emo. Period.

That is not a logical argument, you need to provide at least some form of reasoning. Besides that, Thursday should probably be on this list as many people consider them to be emo, whether you, personally, feel that they are emo or not is not relevant. Greg 02:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clarify

There seems to be a lot of argument on this talk page, with not many people providing actual reasoning. I think the main problem here is that the definition at the beginning of this category is no clear enough. I suggest that the blurb at the beginning has some sort of disclaimer such as:

"This is a list of bands that are considered by a number of people as being emo. As there are many definitions of emo, there is much disagreement in relation to many of these bands and their status as "emo". A band being listed on this page does not necessarily mean it is emo, as this can not be accurately defined, it simply means that a number of people consider the band to be emo in some way."

I think another issue here is that people are taking this far too personally. This category isn't a list of bands that you consider emo, nor is it a list of bands that are universally considered emo, as this would be impossible. Don't take it as an insult if a band you like is placed on this list, it doesn't mean you are then "emo", and you don't need to be offended. I think it might be helpful for some people editing this page to take a look at the Emo article here, especially the history section. A good point to note is that "in many cases, the term has simply been attached to them because of musical similarites, a common fashion sense, or because of the band's popularity within the "emo" scene, not because the band adheres to emo as a music genre." Finally, take a look at the quote by Guy Picciotto. I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment, and as such I don't take offence to being called emo, or to listening to bands that people call emo. I think it is a much better philosophy to adopt than taking 'emo' as an insult. That said, while emo is a meaningless term, it is still far too common to be ignored by Wikipedia. So while it must be included in Wikipedia, I think it should be done in a much more rational fashion. Greg 02:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)