Talk:List of emo artists

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 24 April 2008. The result of the discussion was No Consensus, defaults to Keep.

hm.... im a bit puzzled here... the article is named "list of emo band", yet there's not a single emo band in the entire list....

The article is titled List of emo artists and contains over 30 entries. --neonwhite user page talk 21:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

That's not what he means.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 00:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

What he means is that there are no REAL emo bands on the list. This is just a list of what ignorant people refer to as emo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.17.67.7 (talk) 10:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] This is NOT emo

Seriously. Compare this to the real deal and you'd see that this page is just pop and rock straight out of MTV and has absolutely NOTHING to do with emo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.17.67.7 (talk) 10:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Expert flag.

This is in need of attention from an expert. Coheed and Cambria brings doubts, the failure to mention anything pre-1995 seals them in my mind. Synchronizing with could be a start. Regardless, this needs serious work. Caribouforyou (talk) 00:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It needs nothing like that, this is not an expert subject, it's an element of popular culture. See the Emo. Coheed and Cambria is sourced here [1]. --neonwhite user page talk 01:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

this person had no clue what they were talking about why is the page even still here why is it not deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AidenGraham (talk • contribs) 02:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Because it breaks no policy or guidline.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 08:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I fail to see how an expert (if one exists) could be any help with any list article. What could they do other than help find citations and formatting? --neonwhite user page talk 14:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This article lacks of any real references

My Chemical Romance is not emo. Alexisonfire is not emo, Fall Out Boy? just posers. Real emo music is emocore emo violence, screamo, emopunk, indie/emorock. --Jpkmaster (talk) 05:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

This is a hard article to start because as your comment above goes to prove is that a lot of this is opinion based. Where you may see one band as not being "emo" another person might. crazzycorbe (talk) 14:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Please note wikipedia is not based on personal opinions. It is based on verifiable sources. Which are easily found for all three bands mentioned. Also note the criteria of the list is a list of notable music artists who have been referred to as, or had their music described as 'emo'. --neonwhite user page talk 14:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


Yes wikipedia is based on fact this I know. I was trying to point this out by saying that some comments made are that of opinion and not one of fact. You also have to be careful when using sources. Just because some news source or some magazine calls them emo does not make them emo. crazzycorbe (talk) 14:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
As far as wikipedia is concerned it does. See WP:V for more info on how this policy works. --neonwhite user page talk 16:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
It's not my personal opinion, it's a fact.

My Chemical Romance's music has been described by the media as "pop punk", "alternative rock", "post-hardcore" and "punk revival". The band themselves described their music as simply "rock" or "violent, dangerous pop" on their official website, as well as rejecting the term "emo" to describe their style. Although a source quotes frontman Gerard Way stating that they are "What-else-ya-got-emo", Way has recently stated in an interview that they were never emo, as he says emo is "a pile of shit."

—My Chemical Romance - Wikipedia

While widely considered to be a pop punk and rock band, Fall Out Boy is often described as emo

—Fall Out Boy - Wikipedia
What you really got here is a "fake emo" list. You guys say this is a list of bands that have been called emo... yeah, by the media.--Kmaster (talk) 19:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

And that's all it requires, to have been called emo (I don't care if it's media, just as long as the source is good). I personaly don't think all bands listed are emo. FOB and MCR come to mind, Paramore is another, then there is PATD. But they have been called emo by sources.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 22:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

As someone who's been listening to "emo" for more than ten years of my life, the amount of attention paid to this is pretty hilarious. I used to get all up in arms about what was emo and what wasn't, but I gave that up once I realized that the media is going to take any labels they want, slap it on whatever bands they want, and then run with it and shove it down the public's throat and there isn't a thing any of us can do about it. Seriously, who cares if My Chemical Romance is on this page? How does that affect you personally? Everyone just needs to get over themselves and leave the list alone. This is a classic example of a large group of people fighting a much LARGER group of people who are bringing about change on a widespread scale. It can't be stopped, let alone reversed. Move on with your lives guys.74.69.77.28 (talk) 01:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Egon

The media is the sole definer of labels, they invent them, popularise them and change them. I don't know who people think comes about with genres and styles. They think the bands all get together in conference and decide? --neonwhite user page talk 12:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article Move?

How about this article is moved to something where it is a list of bands that have been called emo. But it couldn't be if we find one website that calls a band emo, that means we put it on the list. A band should only be put on the list if atleast 3 sources say thet band is emo. And we should note that it is a "list of bands called emo", not "emo bands". How's that? icelandic hurricane #12(talk) 15:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Uh... what do you mean? What I'm seeing is that you want this to be a list of bands that have been called emo... that's what it is already. "This is a list of notable music artists who have been referred to as, or had their music described as 'emo'." Says it all. Although I do agree with you about the three sources thing... that's because if we only use one this list *could* get out of hand.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 01:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Only one reliable source is needed to fit the stated criteria. The list is deliberately inclusive to avoid controversey over personal opinion which should have no baring on article content. Remember The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.. We don't need to title it any differently because policy dictates that it is a list of bands that have been called emo by a reliable source. The only reason the criteria reads as it does is for the benefit of less experienced users who are yet to comprehend the policy. It could easily read 'This is a list of emo artists' and still be valid. --neonwhite user page talk 16:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

"The list is deliberately inclusive to avoid controversey over personal opinion which should have no baring on article content.". Thank you for explaining this. "Remember The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." No one was arguing against it so... why did you bring it up?13Tawaazun14 (talk) 15:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the bold. Having a bit of trouble with my computer right now.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 15:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fall out Boy

Is there a reason why FOB is on the list twice? If not I'm going to delete one of them. (Please note I'm not talking about sources)13Tawaazun14 (talk) 00:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nothing in common with emo!

Please, please! The most of these bands have nothing in common with emo! Nothing! [| Mc-ralph] 88.75.65.185 (talk) 23:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

What they have in common is that verifiable sources have referred to them as emo as the criteria states. --neonwhite user page talk 00:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This needs to be re-done

Mainstream magazines do not come into whether a band is Emo, in genre, or not. It's the sound. A band such as 'Bring Me The Horizon' is a deathcore band, due to its heaviness and guttural vocals. It even says it on their Wikipedia page - Bring Me The Horizon!! In most of these bands pages, in the Genre section it says Alternative rock. Emo is a sub-genre of punk! How does a Deathcore band become Emo? Bands such as Rites of Spring and Sunny Day Real Estate are true to the genre, but not My Chemical Romance or Taking Back Sunday. Fall Out Boy are pop punk, always have been. I have no idea why they are suddenly emo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigmund Strife (talk • contribs) 00:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on verifiable sources such as newspapers, journals, magazines etc. not original research.. --neonwhite user page talk 02:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] HIM (his infernal majesty) not EMO!!!!!!!

They are the pionners of the LOVE METAL!!!!!


stupids Ignorants wikipedia!!!



HIM=love metal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.248.44.241 (talk) 17:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

First off, I'm back. Second there is no such thing as "Love Metal", it's not an established genre AFAIK. Third, if it's sourced properly it stays, however I don't see a source. Fourth, isn't this a list of notable artists that have been called emo, keyword being notable? Some of these bands don't seem notable at least not to me.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 19:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you see any red links? --neonwhite user page talk 03:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No but... nevermind. I see what you are saying.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 13:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I cant find any sources for this artist so i'd leave it off the list. --neonwhite user page talk 16:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] the FAKE EMO!!!!! (WIKIPEDIA SPANISH)

Falso emo Desde mediados de los noventas, se produjo un cambio en el significado de los términos "emo" y "screamo", siendo estos atribuidos a una nueva ola de bandas que no tenían ninguna relación con lo que hasta el momento era la música emo. Producto de esto, una nueva escena de "moda emo" vio la luz: estereotipos de auto-mutilación, llantos y las palabras "emo" y "screamo" usadas regularmente pasaron a referirse a bandas pop punk, metalcore, post-hardcore o, simplemente, al rock alternativo en general; entre las bandas más nombradas erróneamente en este género encontramos bandas como Green Day, Blink 182, Panda, My Chemical Romance, Panic! at the Disco, Fall Out Boy, 30 Seconds to Mars, From First to Last, Silverstein, The Devil Wears Prada, Underoath, The Used, Alesana, entre otros. Esto es debido principalmente a los medios de comunicación de la farándula roquera, revistas e internet. A veces también llamado "Popcore", "emobop", "mall emo", "mainstreamo" y "fake emo" (falso emo), por aquella gente "en la onda". Ninguna de estas bandas mantiene similitud bajo ningún aspecto con lo que antes se conocía como screamo o emo: ni en cuanto a música, ética, letras, ni estética.

A la revista NME, a veces se le ha atribuido como la responsable de proponer el "screamo" como el nuevo sonido de moda en el año 2003 y para identificar a bandas como Finch o The Used, las cuales no tienen nada en común.

MySpace, que ofrece perfiles musicales de libre elección, incluye el término emo en la lista de géneros. Sin embargo, muy pocas de estas bandas realmente tocan este tipo de música (debido en parte a que algunas de las bandas de emo tradicional, han optado por usar otros géneros para describir su sonido).



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ HIM (his infernal majesty) Not!!!!!!emo!!!!!, they are Love Metal stupid AMERICANs ignorants!!!!

+++ HIM= gothic,metal,"LOVE METAL!!!!!!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.248.44.241 (talk) 07:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

First, there is no such genre as love metal. You directed us to the name of an album, which means nothing (note what the band thinks it is means nothing either). If Distemper (sorry their wiki page sucks) made an album called Love Punk (dosen't exist does it), it wouldn't change the fact that they are Ska Punk. Second, why did you post something from spanish wikipedia without a translation. Third, "...stupid AMERICANs ignorants!!!!", that's an attack against other people, which violates policy. Fourth, wikipedia is based on properly sourced information (although I see none for HIM), if it is sourced properly it stays, be it true or false. Fifth, sign you posts.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] THREE DAYS GRACE not!!!! emo!!! they are POST GRUNGE!!!!

it s not emo because they classified as POST GRUNGE and Rock alternative and your My Space, and Hate to all those who believe that every artist with black long hair (like a THE BEATLES,pioneers of the hairstyle,and they are not!!!! EMO) is emo! +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

        • They share a tour with bands POST GRUNGE like a:NICKELBACK,BREAKING BENJAMIN and SETHEER

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ THREE DAYS GRACE= POST GRUNGE and ROCK ALTERNATIVE!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.248.44.241 (talk) 00:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on verfiable sources not personal opinion. --neonwhite user page talk 15:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

"Wikipedia is based on verfiable sources not personal opinion.". That is correct but we don't have any source for this (and I doubt we will find one). I'm gonna delete it for now.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 01:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

i couldnt find one but i think the best thing to do is to tag it as uncited, in case someone finds one. --neonwhite user page talk 23:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

That's fine but still, I don't think one will be found, at least not one that is good. When media or other such sources confuse a genre with emo, it's usually a genre that is closly linked to emo, like pop-punk or something. However, I have never seen anyone in the industry confuse Metal with Punk so far. Think like the Nu Metal band, Linkin Park. People call them emo because of lyrical similarities but I ain't seen a good source that calls them emo ever. All you other wikipedians can look for a source but agian, it is unlikely that you'll find one.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 01:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

it would probably be a better use of time to try and source some of the more obvious entries. --neonwhite user page talk 04:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 18:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to find a sorce for Death Cab For Cutie.

Good luck with that. I tried. I could find sources (and here is the odd part) stating that they weren't emo but none saying they are. This is odd because most sources arn't going to say what a bands genre isn't at leaste not in the matter of "never user (insert genre here) to describe (insert band here)" but that's what I found. But I digress, if you can find a good source then go ahead and add them. BTW, please sign your posts.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 22:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This is SO stupid!

Wanna make a list of emo-groupes? then ask the band not the mongols with their opinions! Ill even make you a list! and plz dont ever put FOB in the list of emo-bands! Its an embaressemend to all Emo's if they are put in that list. If they aught to be put in a list, then put them on the "Things-To-Do-list" next to "take out the trash" or prefirably with the trash! Have a bad day! Bye! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.23.33.179 (talk) 18:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on verfiable sources not personal opinion. --neonwhite user page talk 19:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Woooow.

MCR, PATD, Hawthorne Heights, Fall Out Boy, Dashboard Confessional, and The Used are not emo. Pop Punk is not emo. These "verifiable sources" aren't very good. Just because those websites (I looked at MSN, The Village Voice, Music & nightlife, The Michigan Daily, and Rolling Stone) say they are, doesn't mean that they are. They all seem to think emo is the stereotype. MSN even says "Is emo a movement, a catchphrase or just a euphemism for guys with guitars and mascara?" which, in my opinion, pretty much explains that they don't know what they're talking about. The Village Voice says "MySpace emo" which I think means that they are talking about the stereotype. The Michigan Daily says "Emo, short for "emotional" rock, is the toddler-aged genre sweeping the industry with a fever and momentum unseen since the early, pop-punk infused 1990s." Emo isn't Pop Punk. The Michigan Daily also says "and cry their way into new musical territory." Stereotype.

These aren't reliable sources.

Tyler5794 (talk) 00:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
You think that Rolling Stone, possibly the most important and established music magazine in existance with a distinct history of over 40 years, that has reported on just about every major music event since then is not verifiable? the same with MSN, village voice, The Michigan Daily, all have a clear reputation and verifiability. Verifiability isn't based on whether you agree with them or not. The popular media defines musics genres not you. I'd highly recommend thoroughly reading WP:V. --neonwhite user page talk 02:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I knew all this arguing would happen...

I personally don't think all these groups are emo, but i'm not arguing. Note it says that it says "have been called emo", not "are emo". So don't argue about this, because this isn't a list of "emo bands", its a list of bands that are often called "emo", and these bands are definetly in that category. icelandic hurricane #12(talk) 00:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

You are correct, as stated in policy the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that readers should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source. The media defines genres not individuals. We should really write this is in big letter at the top of the page. --neonwhite user page talk 02:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What are you people on about?

right for a start its a bit drastic that the person who started this put "there's not a single emo band on here" What? hhhmmm Rites Of Spring weren't emo? Sunny Day Real Estate weren't emo?

as the emo article on wikipedia says the sound has canged over three waves. The Hardcore stuff, The indie stuff and the modern day stuff. the latest Deep Elm (the people who claimed the genre in the 90s) claim that emo now should be the combination of indie and Hardcore. So i'd class that as Thursday and Alexisonfire wouldn't you?

As for Fall Out Boy and My Chemical Romance they are an embarrassment

and anyway what does all this matter. A group of people who like to be different like these bands and the media calls it Emo who cares? its stuff like this that causes assaults on our streets, unnecessary hatred. i cant get on a bus anymore without been hassled by someone, weather it be a rocker or a chav! stop the hating

and at the end of the day IT DOESN'T MATTER!!

First off, sign your posts. Second, what's with the rant? Third, as long as a band is sourced as emo, it belongs on the list. This isn't a list of artists that are emo, it's a list of artists that have been called emo. There are no absolutes here.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 22:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This List is a FAKE emo!!!

not opinion personal? ok, but this list is your opinion personal!

"""neonwhite"""

and

"""13Tawaazun14 """

This is a list of notable music artists who have been referred to as, or had their music described as 'emo'.--neonwhite user page talk 17:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello mister anonymous user who didn't sign his post by typing four tildes. It's NOT a list of emo bands at all. Thus, NOT fake or real. It IS a list of bands that have been CALLED emo. Our personal opinions arn't involved. I honostly don't think all of the bands that are listed are emo. HOWEVER, they have been CALLED emo by reliable and verifiable sources. Thus they belong on the list.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 19:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sleight problem

added a source for thursday and tokyo hotel dissapeard...WTF?13Tawaazun14 (talk) 19:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

NVM... fixed it.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 19:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

New one, added source for Thursday and Thrice, ref part of the article has them as 1 and 2. How do I fix that?13Tawaazun14 (talk) 22:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean but i'll have a look. --neonwhite user page talk 00:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't clear. What I mean is that when I added the sources for Thursday and Thrice, they were references 31 and 32. Now they are 32 and 33 but that is beside the point. Under the references sheet at the bottom article they were listed as follows:

31. [ 1 ] 32. [ 2 ]

without the spacing. It didn't show the name of the sources as it did for all the others, but now it's fixed. Did you do that? If so, thanks.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 13:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

You have to add it yourself. Put the URL, a space and then the name of the article inside of the [] --neonwhite user page talk 17:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] umm...

Next to Underoath there is a link to the next step article...reason for this?13Tawaazun14 (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

an strange addition by a anon user. --neonwhite user page talk 18:38, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed...13Tawaazun14 (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] correspondence with Emo

"In an even more expanded way than in the 90s, emo has come to encompass an extremely wide variety of bands, many of whom have very little in common. The term has become so broad that it has become nearly impossible to describe what exactly qualifies as "emo"." - It seems to be that the groups that this statement encompasses occupy the vast majority of this article, Fall Out Boy, Paramore, The Academy Is, etc. etc.. Very few of the bands mentioned in the article itself seem to have made it to this list for whatever reason.122.106.53.121 (talk) 13:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not a complete list, feel free to add entries if they can be cited. --neonwhite user page talk 22:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MCR IS NOT EMO

Ohh who said that?MCR is not emo...!I'm an emo girl and Mcr said:"Emo is a garbage dump".If you listen Mcr with another emo groups,you can understand that!(Emo girl 666 (talk) 16:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC))

who said that? - The Village Voice, MTV, NME, MSNBC Music, Rolling Stone all good sources unlike your opinion. --neonwhite user page talk 02:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Ohh come on!Mcr said "emo is a garbage dump".Everyone think wrong things about mcr!And Rolling Stone wrote "Mcr said emo is a garbage dump!.(Emo girl 666 (talk) 07:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC))


Jesus Christ, we've gone over this a thousand times now!!! MCR has been called emo by reliable and verifiable sources. This isn't a list of emo artists it's a list of artists that have been called emo. Believe me, I agree with you but that's not how wikipedia works. And sign your posts. (13Tawaazun14 not signed in)71.179.8.102 (talk) 23:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Essentially it is a list of emo artists, at least as far as wikipedia is concerned it is. --neonwhite user page talk 02:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
No, there arn't absolutes as far as wikipedia is concerened. The criteria for inclusion is varifiability not truth says it right there. As a result as long as the information comes from reliable and varifiable sources it doesn't matter wheather true or false, it get's included. And I don't remember them saying "emo is a garbage dump" but I recall them saying "Emo is shit" or was that Fall Out Boy?71.179.8.102 (talk) 12:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with absolutes, if something can be verified then it is considered to be a fact. Therefore, as far as wikipedia is concerned, all the bands that has verified sources can be said to be emo. It's up to the reader to be familiar with how wikipedia gathers info. If this wasn't the case it would be impossible to assert anything. --neonwhite user page talk 04:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
You missed my point but I'll let it go, this isn't the place to argue this.71.179.8.102 (talk) 21:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Ultimately there is no such thing as true or false, the truth has always been subjective and always will be but as far as we are concerned we write what the sources say and it's up to the reader to decide what they believe. --neonwhite user page talk 00:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
That's what I said but you've misread my post or I wasn't clear. I no longer care because I've lost interest in this pointless and useless arguement.71.179.8.102 (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No,Mcr said"emo is a garbage dump".I read it in Rolling Stone.Fall Out Boy never said"emo is shit".I think Mcr said it too.(Emo girl 666 (talk) 12:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC))

Well done, what's your point? --neonwhite user page talk 00:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bullet for my Valentine

I think Bullet for my Valentine should be added. 193.91.240.134

Can you source it?13Tawaazun14 (talk) 18:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I think too.Bullet for my valentine should be added!!(Emo girl 666 (talk) 07:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC))

Still we need a source.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 14:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Bullet For My Valentine is emo.Come on...Everyone know that!(Emo girl 666 (talk) 15:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC))

I know, but it still needs to be sourced. That's how wikipedia works.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 16:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I would agree but the problem with relatively unknown bands is that they no-one is writing about them so we have no sources. --neonwhite user page talk 23:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Bullet for My Valentine is METAL. This information was taken from their MySpace. If the artist themselves label themselves as metal and not emo, they're not emo. Seriously, do you people even read up on your arguments or just need a way to pass time?

I don't believe a bands myspace is considered a reliable source. You don't know what your on about. Also if a reliable source calls them emo, then they are on wikipedia... so far though, no one has.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 23:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] PARAMORE

Paramore is not emo!They are not have any relation with emo!I don't care sources!THEY ARE NOT EMO!!!(Emo girl 666 (talk) 17:01, 23 April 2008 (UTC))

Now would be a good time to remind you that this isn't a list of emo artists, it's a list of artists that have been called emo. Keyword being called. While I agree with you that they arn't emo, they have been called emo by sources.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't care!No one can say,paramore is called emo!(Emo girl 666 (talk) 14:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC))

NME[2] and the NY Times[3] do. --neonwhite user page talk 23:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Look if you don't like the source/s then I think the best place to take it up is at WP:RSN, though I doubt you'll actually get anything done.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 00:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep i agree Paramore are not emo as they look and sing and act nothing like emoS! They are punk pop or pop rock not emo despite being stereotyped as that because young teens like them and they themselves are very young!! --Seán Travers (talk) 22:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Seán Travers, 23:36, 10 May 2008

True or not they are sourced as emo and thus, Paramore stays.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 19:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Simple Plan

In my opinion Simple Plan is not emo and there is no source either. Should we keep it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.62.34.236 (talk) 22:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Not yet. There is a fact tag next to it so if someone can find a source then it stay's however if it says unsourced for a long period of time I would not be opposed to its removal from this list. BTW, please sign your posts with four tildes (~).71.179.8.102 (talk) 01:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Atreyu

Atreyu are HEAVY METAL. Lately there have been several added groups that have been called pop punk down as emo. That is understandable because emo is a sub-genre of pop punk. But Atreyu is Heavy Metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.62.34.236 (talk) 20:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Emo is a Sub-Genre of Hardcore Punk not pop punk, although these two are often confused, as modern emo and pop punk sound similar. But I digress, if Atreyu can be sourced as emo, they should stay. If they can't, however, then they sould not be on the list.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 00:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[4] OCWeekly is a decently reliable publication, however it reads like an editorial and however correct this guy's insight might be, i dunno how reliable it is. --neonwhite user page talk 03:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Um...

That was a lot of vandalism and it's not all gone. Is it possible to get some one to semi protect this page?(13Tawaazun14 not signed in)71.179.227.101 (talk) 01:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Already requested. --neonwhite user page talk 14:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 16:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit]  ?

I seem to be having trouble viewing the source for Rise Against. The ref section says it is invalid. Any one else having trouble with this?71.179.227.101 (talk) 19:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Just cheked it and it doesn't seem to be properly sourced, Deleted. It just says : ref name=cbs...that's it?71.179.227.101 (talk) 19:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

should have been cbc. [5] --neonwhite user page talk 20:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I have no problem with them being on the list provided they are sourced. They were not before so I deleted them.71.179.227.101 (talk) 23:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Emo artists? Or artists called emo?

As I read in the talk page, there is a lot of confusion of the name List of emo artists. So I think the name of the article should be renamed to List of artists called emo. 008'/,treme (talk) 15:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree when I first saw it I removed bands I knew weren't emo because the page does say "List of EMO ARTISTS" implying that those listed below are emo! So the title should be changed because a little explanation isn't enough. It has to be made very clearly by changing the title. --Krysta now (talk) 00:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not based on your personal opinion of bands. All are cited and the criteria is specific. The title is in line with policy and all other list articles. It is as simple and clear as possible. As far as wikipedia is concerned if it can be sourced reliably it is considered a fact. Wikipedia does not make any claims to be the 'truth'. It merely reports what other sources have already published. --neonwhite user page talk 17:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Up a long time

Some of the bands here seem to have been up for a while without being sourced. The 3 I'm refering to are Alesana, Blessthefall and Elliott. Can I delete them or should I let them stay a bit longer?13Tawaazun14 (talk) 18:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It's up to you, there's no minimum or maximum time you can leave unsourced stuff, any editor is free to remove them at any time. Allmusicguide says blessthefall are screamo, calls alesana post-hardcore but does call elliott emo so i'll add that. --neonwhite user page talk 22:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)