Talk:List of power pop musicians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE: This is a list of notable bands and musicians that have been described as power pop, or contributing power pop music. For an explanation of the history and evolution of the genre, the reader can see the main article, which includes bands and musicians of historical significance. This article can include not just historically significant bands and musicians, but can offer readers a way to explore noteworthy power pop musicians of less importance, and thus a way to expand personal discographies within the genre, or seek out live performances by upcoming power pop musicians. Note also WP guideline for lists: Wikipedia:List Proposed by: Gekritzl 23:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Previous Incarnation

It seems like maybe this article existed before and was deleted because of people arguing about who should be on it? But a) there are lists for other genres still in existence, and b) there was a redlink from Power pop which should be removed if this page is removed.

--Hcethatsme 19:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup message

Bot identified the article as needed cleanup and put the relevant maintenance tags. Please fix the identified problems. If you think the maintenance tags were put in error then just revert the bot's edits. If you have any questions please contact the bot owner.

Yours truly AlexNewArtBot 22:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please limit this to notable bands

This list shouldn't be an exhaustive list of all bands that are considered power pop since it won't really be useful to people who know nothing about the genre or are trying to find out more about important bands.

[edit] Erroneous Deletions

Yes, we should limit this to notable bands. But there have been massive deletions of very notable bands here. Did these deletionists do any research? The legendary Spongetones have been deleted! According to John M. Borack, "The Spongetones have been making essential power pop records since the early '80s"[1]. Absolute Powerpop mentions them in the same breath as The Rubinoos.[2] They even have a cut on a Powerpop collection alongside The Romantics, Bangles, Smithereens, La's [3]. It appears some user simply went to all bands that don't have wikipedia pages (yet) and deleted them. Rather than deleting notable bands, how about contributing by researching, and making articles on those bands? Having an article on Wikipedia is not an indication of notability. What is? See WP:BAND. These bands/artists that have been deleted meet the criteria of #4, 5, and/or 6, at a minimum. Thus WP considers them notable. That I was able to find the citations here is an indication that this is also verifiable (another WP criterion). Please don't delete if you don't know what you're talking about. For instance, Cherry Twister was deleted for the reason "not notable." HUH?? They've been called "timeless & brilliant powerpop & pop", and have several CDs out. Pop Matters [4] calls the members of Cherry Twister "a notable lot". Sparkwood Press Reviews [5] mentions Cherry Twister in the same breath as other similarly notable bands: "artists like Fountains Of Wayne, Cherry Twister and The Davenports..." Same with Steve Ward. They deleted The Tories. Amazon lists The Tories on their page "Power Pop: Drugs of those addicted to Melody" [6] alongside Fountains of Wayne, Cheap Trick, The Grays, The Beatles, etc. Grammy-nominated[7] Owsley was deleted!! Unbelievable. Allmusic guide [8] mentions he worked with Shania Twain and Amy Grant. In prior Will Owsley bands, Ben Folds was a member.[9] Besides his own CDs, Owsley is included in "International Pop Overthrow" Volume 7. Just because you're not familiar with an artist (or because they don't have a WP page yet), please don't delete notable and exemplary performers of Powerpop here. Start an article instead - that is, CONTRIBUTE instead of tearing down this body of knowledge. Heck, start with the information and citations here if you want, and make WP articles on these notable powerpop bands and musicians that have been deleted from this article... again, instead of deleting. And clearly, deleting Grammy-nominated and other notable musicians from this article must have been done blindly; it seems that not having a WP article was the sole criterion for declaring many of them not notable. Gekritzl 17:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Someone also deleted The Beatles from the list. They, along with The Who, invented the genre. Ticket To Ride, Day Tripper, Getting Better, Help, Taxman, I Need You, countless more Beatles songs are essental Powerpop. In fact, the term "Beatles power-pop" (or "Beatles/power-pop") is often used. Here are just a few examples I found on the web: [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] Gekritzl 23:20, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I only find one Cherry Twister album out on an independent label. They aren't considered notable according to Wikipedia's definition. I think the point is that you don't want people using these kinds of lists to advertise their bands. There are at least 20 or 30 power pop bands I would put on this list if I had my way, but it really isn't that helpful to put up a bunch of bands that aren't really that well known or fall into multiple genres. As far as The Beatles or The Who, they could be on the list for every single rock and roll style listed. Are they primarily a power pop band? Or even secondarily? Cank 21:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Your point is well taken and well noted. Note however that Owsley didn't just work with Shania Twain, he also had a band with Ben Folds in it (this qualifies him in WP). I merely mentioned that he worked with Shania Twain and Amy Grant to bolster the argument for his notability. You probably have the same opinion about Shania Twain and Amy Grant that I have, but that doesn't enter into the criteria. Regarding the fact that Cherry Twister chose to go indie, WP:BAND doesn't say that a band with an album out on an independent label is not notable; it merely mentions recording on a "major label or... important indie labels" as a criterion that would make them notable. It lists many other criteria, any one of which deems them notable, and Cherry Twister meets "Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture" (for example, the citations I gave above, among many others). By the way, that CD was internationally released on a major label in Europe (Castle Records[16]) - which meets WP:BAND criteria. Great Indie Music refers to At Home With Cherry Twister as the "legendary Cherry Twister album." Moreover, Steve Ward records under the name "Cherry Twister" and his own name for a total of 3 CDs thusfar, including Not Lame records (that's two major labels and an indie label). Regarding the Beatles, I would call them "essential power-pop" whereas the body of work by The Who is more mainstream rock. (IMHO) I didn't put The Who on the list. Thanks for your WP contributions. Based on the above arguments I think you have to agree Cherry Twister and Steve Ward are WP notable (even independently) and belong on the list. Gekritzl 22:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Someday I'll find the time to take all these facts and citations (and more), and make real articles on these notable musicians - Owsley, Cherry Twister, The Spongetones, The Tories.
Regarding The Tories, Avion's front man Steve Bertrand was formerly The Tories' lead singer. That and other factors I mentioned definitely meets WP:BAND criteria.
P.P.S. I'll grant you some of the others you deleted as being not notable. :) Thanks again for your contributions. Gekritzl 22:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with the bands you posted based on the references, and I definitely think you should copy and paste some of the stuff you wrote above into some real articles. The sad truth is that a lot of these bands, even ones that are considered important in the genre, like 20/20, have hardly any information on their pages. Cank 01:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion of Article's Purpose and Notability Criteria

My thoughts are this - I agree with Cank that it would probably be useful to have "1st Tier" "2nd Tier" "3rd Tier" pages. Since that doesn't exist, I think it helps just a little by putting Main article: Power pop on the List of power pop musicians page (which I did the other day), thus referring anyone who finds the "list" to the main page, and thus the genre's history, and 1st and 2nd tier groups. Regarding making the page to be useful to people who know nothing about the genre - that's covered by the Power pop page. I think the "list" page is really useful for people who are already familiar with the main powerpop bands - they have the Jellyfish, Badfinger, Marshall Crenshaw, Format, Nick Lowe, Knack, Squeeze, etc, and need to be turned on to exemplary powerpop bands that are not as well known. Does that make sense? Thus I think the bands on the "list" page don't have to meet WP:Band notability criteria (that is, all "3 tiers" can be listed here), but must still be somewhat notable (e.g. they need to have a CD out, or have affiliations with a notable band), and the information needs to be verifiable. Gekritzl 00:04, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

The WP guideline for lists is here: Wikipedia:List. It doesn't say anything about notability requirements, but says that lists "should always include unambiguous statements" about what is appropriate for inclusion on the list, which this page didn't do. I'll attempt to do so. Gekritzl 22:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The band Tsar is mentioned two times!

I think someone sould remove the duplicate!Can anyone do that?

[edit] Beatles, etc should not be included

The early power pop bands of the 70s like Badfinger and Big Star were notable for having a sound inspired by The Beatles, The Byrds, The Who, etc. during a time when prog, boogie, and hard rock reigned supreme among rock fans. The Beatles, et al are the bands that INFLUENCED power pop. If you're going to include then why not include every guitar-based pop band from the 60's? This is supposed to be a serious site, not a fan site. We all love The Beatles and The Who, but couldn't we be little more accurate here? Journalistic integrity should come before all things. John 22:49 19 July 2007

[edit] Beatles, etc should be included

Hi John - I'm sure your edits are in good faith. Let me point out that the main page is in error and should be corrected - Pete Townshend said "Power pop is what we play" in 1967. Thus, powerpop is not just later music that was inspired by The Who and The Beatles; it started with The Who and The Beatles in the 1960s. Also, not every guitar-based pop band from the 60's is powerpop -- The Troggs, The Beach Boys, The Lovin' Spoonful, Simon & Garfunkel, Van Morrison, Surfaris, Kingsmen... to name a few. However, every powerpop band from the 60s belongs on the list. This is a list of powerpop bands.

Also in the book Can You Feel the Silence?: Van Morrison: A New Biography by Clinton Heylin (p. 75) he says "The fact that Them were doing their own material in the spring of 1964, pre-Kinks, pre-Who, was unusual enough. The Beatles excepted, almost every British powerpop combo relied on the same staple diet of R&B/soul standards from which to cull their basic repertoire..."

Not including The Beatles etc. in this list would be like not including The Wright Brothers in a list of airplane pilots.

It's indeed not a fan site. How in the world does it look like one? It's a comprehensive list.

I see you've also undone some of my other edits - "Cute Is What We Aim For" (Spin Magazine called them "emo power-pop"). Even their singer Shaant calls them "power pop with intellectual lyrics."[17][18][19] If "The Curse Of Curves" isn't powerpop, then neither is Stacey's Mom. And there are three citations on Snow Patrol indicating they're powerpop. Can I ask why you've made those changes? Regards, Gekritzl 23:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beatles, etc.

Hi Gekritzl. The early Power Pop bands mixed British Invasion and folk-rock styled melody & harmony sounds with contemporary hard rock guitars. "Power" and "Pop", hence, Power Pop.

The Bealtes encompassed so much more than "Power Pop", they were the Beatles! Putting the Beatles in the category would be like including an eagle an a list of airplane pilots. They were part of the original thing that inspired the first wave of power pop bands. And there of course already is page for British Invasion bands that much better serves The Beatles and The Who. See also Beat music.

The French New Wave film movement of the late 50's and early 60's used a film like Jean Renoir's Rules Of The Game as a template, does this mean that The Rules Of The Game could be used a an example of a French New Wave film? Certainly not.

As a lover of 60's music I could think of hundreds of bands that had from the 1960's that had a jangly guitar sound and melodies and harmonies that I could add as well if we're going to be adding The Beatles and The Who (and the Zombies? more on that later). If we're editing Wikipedia, I think it's important to have a great deal of knowledge on the subject that we're editing. You want to add Emo bands and bands like Snow Patrol to the list, but is that really keeping true to the subject? Would they really give a person unfamiliar with Power Pop an accurate understanding of the style? Why cause this confusion? Are you just trying to get fans of those bands to check out the bands on this page? That's noble enough, but this not a fan site, and accuracy should be the goal here.

Anybody call can call himself anything he wants, it doesn't make it true. There are plenty of emo bands with sounds that are much closer to Power Pop than Cute Is What We Aim For, does this mean that they belong here too? Why not My Chemical Romance while you're at it? They have harmonies and melodies and loud guitars, don't they? And pretty much any teen-oriented punk pop/emo band. Aren't there already categories on Wikipedia that better serve these bands?

And why did you add the Zombies? They are definitely one of my favorite bands of all time, but you know, they were a keyboard-based band, not really "power" anything. Baroque pop seems more apt. Yes they did have a few ravers in the catologue like "Indication" but that's more of a freakbeat rocker. And like I said, there is already an article for the British Invasion. And there's already an article for psychedelic bands. There are already articles for all of these things. And, if the Zombies then why not The Left Banke or The Bee Gees?

I think we should keep the spirit here pure.

John, 2:32 20 July 07

[edit] Bulk Deletions

209.244.188.1 - John - please stop deleting bands from this list that are described as power pop (or "rock/pop") on their own pages. If you disagree with such bands being on this list, make your argument for a change in genre on those bands' own articles' discussion pages. It is poor sport of you to remove so many such entries from this list simply because you alone disagree, especially when you do so without a word. H3G3M0N 20:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

H3GEMON, please explain why the Zombies belong on this list. Their own page doesn't list them as power pop, just British Invasion and Psychedelic Pop. You seem to want to open up this list up to bands that fall outside of the Power Pop genre. Why? Why are you even editing a subject that you apparently know so little about? So, if you're going to add a band like Snow Patrol, why not Coldplay and The Fray? If you want to add Cute Is What We Aim For, why not Panic At The Disco and Fall Out Boy? And why not every single emo/pop band, for that matter? Why are Barenaked Ladies on this list?

John, regarding your comment to H3GEMON, "Why are you even editing a subject that you apparently know so little about?" - please see WP:Talk ("no insults"). Also, please remember to "sign" your comments with the four tildes (~~~~). Thank you... --- Gekritzl 21:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
If you look back into the history of this list, H3GEMON has added bands like 311 and Good Charlotte. Perhaps I should have worded it better, but I do call his authority on this subject into question.

Timeless7 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


Where do we draw the line? Why not hair bands while we are at it? Is "Talk Dirty To Me" by Poison power pop? Certainly more than anything by Cute Is What We Aim For or Hellogoodbye. This list has very little journalistic integrity.

John 2:33, 22 July 2007

[edit] Beatles/Deletions/etc

It's certainly an interesting and lively discussion! I'll try to address some points, and cite references where possible. And these talk forums can come across very cold, so please don’t take offense, and don't think I'm "lecturing" - I'm trying not to. But I'm trying to make a cogent, verifiable argument, while keeping Wikipedia policy in mind.

[edit] Purpose of the List

From WP:List:

  • "Lists should always include unambiguous statements of membership criteria based on definitions made by reputable sources, especially in difficult or contentious topics."
  • "...a lead section should be provided which briefly and clearly describes the list, as well as the criteria for inclusion in the list."
  • "It should not be asserted that the most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one."

The list article does have a lead section that states the purpose of the list: "This is a list of notable bands and musicians that have been described as power pop, or contributing power pop music. For an explanation of the history and evolution of the genre, see the main article, which includes bands and musicians of historical significance. The list below includes not just significant bands and musicians, but offers readers a way to explore noteworthy power pop musicians of less importance, and expand personal discographies within the genre."

I have to admit to being the author of that lead section. When I first came upon the list it simply said "This is a list of notable bands that have been described as power pop." It wasn't up to the WP:List standard, and I also felt the list would be more useful if it expanded the reader's knowledge base regarding bands contributing to the genre, rather than just listing notable bands (most of which are named on the main article anyway).

[edit] Criteria for Inclusion

Mostly the discussion here centers on the criteria for inclusion. The "Purpose" statement went into this a little bit, but perhaps needs more. One problem is, as I've noted on this Talk page before, that the main article is in error about the definition - more on this later.

So, there is some desire to keep the list "pure," which is (in my opinion) a good idea. The first trouble is, no band is pure powerpop. Even bands producing the best examples of the genre - for example "No Matter What" (Badfinger), and Stacey's Mom (Fountains of Wayne) - do not record powerpop only. So, we're getting a little subjective when we say "only pure powerpop bands" should be listed here.

I agree, there really is no such thing as "pure". Instead, I think we should keep this list for bands that are notable specifically for playing power pop. And that would surely include Badfinger and Fountains Of Wayne, but not so much The Beatles.

Timeless7 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

John brings up an excellent example - Poison's "Talk Dirty To Me" certainly borders on powerpop. Yet (and I'm sure this is John's point) Poison shouldn't be listed here! (Of course, they aren't.) And Aerosmith's Jaded is even more powerpop (again, just opinion). I wouldn't include Aerosmith here. (As an aside, a list called "List of Powerpop Songs" could rightly include Aerosmith's "Jaded" even though Aerosmith's normal musical route is pure rock.)

Right, Poison does not belong here. But neither does Snow Patrol. And neither do the emo bands that have been included.

Why must we stretch this category to include non-Power Pop bands? This is a list of of Power Pop musicians, would it really be accurate to call Snow Patrol Power Pop musicians? Is Power Pop the genre that they are known for playing? You may have found a citation somewhere, but I have found citations for many bands - including Poison, both Nirvanas, Fall Out Boy, etc etc. It doesn't mean that these bands belong on this list. We have to use common sense and draw the line where things should be obvious. Timeless7 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

So again we're in a gray, subjective area, which is not good from WP point of view (in particular, WP:OR). It would be much more objective and verifiable if the list were a list of powerpop songs. Another good reason for such a list is that the "as recorded" version is what should be listed. For example, "Kid" by The Pretenders is rock, almost powerpop; as recorded by "Everything But The Girl," however, it's more like folk or folk rock.

I'm not proposing we change the list to a list of powerpop songs, by the way.

I guess we can't avoid being a little subjective in editing the page. Please, however, where there are valid references stating that a band produced significant contributions to the powerpop genre, allow the band to remain in the list.

In fact, perhaps we should be citing references for more of the bands we add to the list.

[edit] What is Powerpop?

Let's discuss (with examples, and references where possible) the question of the definition. This discussion is also appropriate for the main article:

[edit] Guitar riffs

Although the main article says "...prominent guitar riffs," that's not necessarily the case. As currently written, it seems to indicate that a song is only powerpop if it contains all of the following elements "strong melodies, crisp vocal harmonies, economical arrangements and prominent guitar riffs."

What the main article should say is something like "The music typically incorporates a combination of musical devices such as strong melodies, crisp vocal harmonies, economical arrangements, and prominent guitar riffs."

Consider the following examples of powerpop, where guitars are not at all prominent:

[edit] Etymology

Regarding the history/definition, it seems there are two schools of thought:

  1. Some people think that it includes only music that was inspired by certain up-beat songs by the likes of the Beatles and the Who (e.g. "Ticket to Ride", "The Kids Are Alright")
  2. The other viewpoint considers bands like the Beatles, Who, Them, the Everly Brothers, the Hollies and others as the originators of the genre, and therefore they are included, along with those (later) who are influenced by the original sound.

The opinions of people on either side are not of much concern here, as we have historical precedence that can't be denied. Since the term "power pop" was used in 1967 by Pete Townshend to describe a certain type of rock music being created at that time, its definition is clearly music of The Who, Beatles, etc. Townshend could not possibly have been referring to the Raspberries or Badfinger. In fact, rather than saying "the Raspberries play powerpop" it may be more correct to say "the Raspberries play music inspired by 1960s powerpop" (although I would not put it like that myself).

Townshend used the term "power pop" as a clever way of describing his band's music. He also referred to it as "Maximum R&B", which I think was pretty cool too. Were the Who really notable for being a "power pop" band though? Was that what they are known for?Timeless7 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


It is my proposal to fix the main article, placing the etymology closer to the beginning with citations, and to fix the current definition based on historical use.

More examples of use:

  • The Universal CD "Fab Gear: Classic Flower Power Pop from the Summer of Love" (August 6, 2007, ASIN: B000SPL2AY) includes such songs as Fool On The Hill (Beatles, 1967), Carrie-Anne (Hollies, 1965), and Incense & Peppermints (Strawberry Alarm Clock, 1967). So the people at Universal are of the opinion that power pop includes those mid-1960s bands.
  • In the book Can You Feel the Silence?: Van Morrison: A New Biography by Clinton Heylin (p. 75) he says "The fact that Them were doing their own material in the spring of 1964, pre-Kinks, pre-Who, was unusual enough. The Beatles excepted, almost every British powerpop combo relied on the same staple diet of R&B/soul standards from which to cull their basic repertoire..." (The point here is that Clinton Heylin considers The Beatles etc to be powerpop.)

[edit] Citations

Again, regarding "Cute Is What We Aim For" - Spin Magazine called them "emo power-pop". Even their singer Shaant calls them "power pop with intellectual lyrics." (Citations are in previous Talk sections above.) Since these are notable sources, we should add the citations to the list page. It would get out of hand if we made a policy that every band should have a citation "proving" (I say this jokingly) that they've contributed significantly to powerpop, but on borderline cases (or where there are bands brought into question, like Zombies and CIWWAF) it's probably a good idea.

Question - is this "Shaant" character really a reliable source? For instance, he called their lyrics intellectual. Are their lyrics intellectual? Can we even be certain that he knows what "power pop" means, and that he wasn't just being "clever"? I've found citations for Fall Out Boy, My Chemical Romance, and others. I don't think that these bands belong in this list, but if we're going to be using your criteria, then I would say that they do.

Timeless7 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Zombies

Regarding The Zombies, The Rolling Stone Illustrated History of Rock and Roll describes "Tell Her No" as a "standard Beatles" cut (Random House, 1992, ISBN 0679737286). The following site classifies the 1964 single She's Not There / Tell Her No as powerpop: [20]

Spike Priggen created a Power pop tribute album, including music of the Zombies.

I hate to cite WP, but just to add to this point, the main powerpop article says "Several groups that arose in the wake of The Beatles' success were important in the evolution of the power pop style, such as The Beau Brummels, The Hollies, and The Zombies."

First off, the main article is poorly written in many places and is in need of a cleanup. And that Spike Priggen album is great, but you know, he covers bands on that album that one would not consider Power Pop. The article may describe it as a "Power Pop tribute album" but the article itself is a poor source - for instance, it describes The Jacobites as a local Connecticut band, but as you may know, the Jacobites were a duo from the UK, comprised of the late, great Nikki Sudden & Dave Kusworth. They were pretty wonderful, but not PP.

Timeless7 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Barenaked Ladies

Barenaked Ladies are on the list for their powerpop songs like It's All Been Done, Brian Wilson, Fun & Games, Get in Line, Another Spin, Wind it Up, Bull in a China Shop, etc.

[edit] Conclusion

I've stated my case, and your input is definitely appreciated. Thank you. --- Gekritzl 21:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What I propose

I propose that we limit this list to bands & artists that are notable specifically for playing Power Pop. I think that's the only way that this list can maintain journalistic integrity. Wikipedia is supposed to be a serious site. There's no reason why the integrity of its content should be any less than that of print encyclopedias.

I'm for that, as long as we don't limit to just "notable bands", or we'll end up with not much more than just a list of bands that are already named in the main article. Please also define what is meant by "notable specifically for playing Power Pop". Thanks -- Gekritzl 20:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Gekritzl. I left you some responses in your larger section above that might better clarify what I mean. ---

Timeless7 21:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

If you're going to add Snow Patrol or other bands that fall outside of the genre of Power Pop, then you are just creating anarchy and confusion. Clarity should be the aim here.

Timeless7 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I actually think in principle that this is a good idea. Unfortunately, some of the most important people/bands in this genre have released albums with strikingly different sounds. Just some off the top of my head: Todd Rundgren's "Runt" vs. "A Wizard, A True Star". Plus so many musicians play songs on classic power-pop albums that would be best labeled as country rather than Power Pop -- Matthew Sweet's "Girlfriend," The Replacements, Big Star/Alex Chilton, etc. I think this is the problem more with the genre being one that is so imprecise.
All of the bands you listed in the paragraph above are certainly notable for playing Power Pop and releasing some of pivotal albums of the genre. One would hard pressed to come up with any great artist who has not departed from his original sound at point or another in his career. I think that what we need to avoid is including the bands that are primarily notable for other things, such as the beat music groups of the mid-60's, emo bands, and Snow Patrol. I think we should be more concerned with adding Power Pop bands to this list who belong there but haven't been included yet (such as Michel Pagliaro, Van Duren, and Prix), rather than trying to stretch the spirit of this list to include bands that fall outside of the genre.

Timeless7 21:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

But regardless, I think this list is pretty crazy looking. It has been proposed before, but maybe we could do something that is like tiered list where we list bands that are important/very specific to the genre first, and list other bands in another group. Even doing the list chronologically would probably solve this. Cank 17:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Exactly, that's the whole problem. I don't think that the genre is imprecise; it's just that no one band is pure power pop. Perhaps another list should be made, List of Power Pop Songs. Thus, Aerosmith's "Jaded" would make it to that list (IMHO), but most other Aerosmith songs surely would not. Michael Penn's "No Myth" would make it, but "Long Way Down" would not. About half of Nick Lowe's songs would make it, about half wouldn't. There would be much less contention/debate than there is here. But I like this page because it introduces me to music I might never have heard otherwise. I can then go to Amazon, Napster, or the artist's web page and decide if the style is to my liking. -- Gekritzl 18:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Nick Lowe and Michael Penn are well known for playing Power Pop music, while Aerosmith isn't. Not every song of theirs are going to fall into the category, but both Lowe and Penn have had the reputation of being Power Pop musicians. It's cool that you have found some artists thanks to this site, but you know, this is supposed to be encyclopedia, and not a fan site. There are plenty of power pop websites and blogs to provide for you that kind of community.

Timeless7 21:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what I meant - can't think of another song by Aerosmith that would be classified as powerpop, and I certainly wouldn't put Aerosmith on the list (even if I found a reputable source that referred to the band as powerpop!). If there was a list of powerpop songs, Jaded would belong. Yes, and some Nick Lowe is closer to country than powerpop (although it seems most of Pure Pop for Now People is pure powerpop). I still don't see how the list looks like a fan site, though. It's still just a list. :) -- Gekritzl 23:06, 28 July 2007 (UTC)