Talk:Brokencyde

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

Bits and Pieces[edit]

PhatJ's name is "Julian", not "Jason" ~PhatJ's Mom :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueFizz (talk • contribs) 17:42, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect vandalism at the end of the first paragraph, mostly because before I went and fixed it, there were obvious and quite stupid typos strewn liberally about the sentence. I left in the text because, hey, maybe they are gay, I don't know. Probably vandalism, though. FloydianHate (talk) 09:43, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seven's real name is Steve.. -Nikki & Leeza —Preceding unsigned comment added by Napkin1248 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


It might be good to note that brokeNCYDE endorses CRUNK energy drink. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceevichee (talk • contribs) 17:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, that would be fairly pointless to note, and it would border on the line of advertising as well. DelphinidaeZeta (talk) 03:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Videography[edit]

Recently I added a video that wasn't on the article but it was..erased, the 40 Oz video which was recorded months ago and that also had a little cut up on the band's MySpace page and it is up on YouTube too [1], so there is the evidence that the video exists, can I or anybody put it back there?

Also taking away the video stuff, if you search among some download sites, you can find that the band is cataloged as screamo and emotronic. Bc13rox (talk) 01:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Download sites do not count as valid sources in Wikipedia. It has to be from a reliable source, not "some download sites". Otherwise, as one downloading site put it, the band Cynic would be Alternative Rock in Wikipedia.

D33PPURPLE (talk) 02:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)D33PPURPLE[reply]

Ah ok, I'm sorry about that, but anyways I am right with the 40 Oz Video thing, so, agree with that? Bc13rox (talk) 19:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, about the video...Yes, you can post the video, but I would recommend putting it at the end of the article as an external link. I forgot exactly where those links go, but I believe it is just above the footnotes. Sorry I'm not much help on this part. I usually just tidy up articles

D33PPURPLE (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)D33PPURPLE[reply]

Ok thanks...and I added the link at the end of the article, but I think that the description is not good...Bc13rox (talk) 03:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]



Okay, saw your edit, and saw someone deleted it...I have no idea why it shouldn't be displayed. It is on the band's myspace page, right? If so, then yes, it is very valid and an external link should do.

If it is not fromt their myspace, proof must be provided that the video is official...

If it is official and it keeps on getting deleted I shall try and get that locked.

@ Revisors, why are you deleted the 40 Oz. Video?

D33PPURPLE (talk) 23:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)D33PPURPLE[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4XOAxAbUAw

Attention All Page Editors[edit]

Here's the deal: Before you do anything, you should either discuss it on the talk page, or back your edit/revision with a proper reference. You cannot label the band "Screamo" without providing a legitimate source saying that the band is screamo.

If you have no sources, then you should not edit the article to what you would consider an adequate tag. This is called Original Research and Wikipedia Guidelines do not allow it. Thanks.

D33PPURPLE (talk) 23:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)D33PPURPLE[reply]

Here's a few:
  • [1] - brokeNCYDE MySpace page bears the label "Screamo / Electronica"
  • [2] LA Times music blog describes them as a "screamo-crunk act"
  • [3] The Guardian's music blog describes them as a "mixture of screamo metal and crunk rap".
  • [4] "Official" (?) Brokencyde Facebook page describes their style as a "blend of screamo and Top 40 hip-hop"
No offence, but this reads like a pretty standard Wikipedia genre argument: (1) I like genre x (2) I do not like band y (3) Therefore band y cannot possibly play genre x. --Stormie (talk) 03:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Video/Minor Details and some other things..[edit]

Hi there, again I ask (as up there it says that we have to post here before any change) to add the 40 Oz Video, it just came out recently: http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.channel&friendID=85699815&n=85699815 Also if you watch some of those vids you will find that the screams aren't fake...So there we go again to the big discussion of the genre.. Other thing is the rating of the videos which makes it a well-listened band.

The recent album hit the number 23 on iTunes the day it came out, I can't prove it because of the fact that myspace erases the bulletins.. but if you go and read the comments of the album on iTunes, you will find there is one that says that couldn't believe it got in the top ten list...

Finally, why there isn't a little section on unreleased songs? Some of them went popular as one can find on youtube, or at imeem.com

Oh oh, I forgot something, if you go to the new album's folder, you will find that Mikl (as the rest of the band does to) leaves a note, and there it talks about the person that "broke" his heart, does that work to the "citation needed" for the Background? Bc13rox (talk) 03:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the following guidelines for answers to your questions: WP:BAND and WP:RS. Please notice that Myspace and Youtube are not considered reliable sources. Any information that can't be verified independently of these sources will normally be removed. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 06:37, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ummm can you tell me when did I said to put them as sources? I didn't do it... I just mentioned the myspace video so the 40 Oz. vid doesn't go away as it happened to me a month ago, as we all have to check here before any change... also as down it says, myspace is one of the best sources for this, as they redirect their webpage to their myspace.... anyway, again, i never said to use myspace and youtube as sources this time (read up there is a little section about the 40Oz. video) so.. read all what one says before postin the guidelines twice again please. :) Bc13rox (talk) 21:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
by the way xD, could you help me with something? as you know so much here..and I admit I don't because some stuff have changed here in the past months, how can I upload the picture of the Broken! ? because I have the one that was here before the article was ereased again months ago, and it has a very good quality.. the problem is that i dunno what license should i select? if you can help me, thank you. Bc13rox (talk) 21:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Inside[edit]

I found a source for the citation needed part on here where they say the idea of the name comes from being broken inside. Right here is the interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvInqiTvt0o —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mixernack (talk • contribs) 17:30, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the following guidelines on what is considered an acceptable source of information on Wikipedia here: WP:RS and WP:V. Please note that this does not include Myspace and Youtube. I have left additional information on your userpage. Best regards on your future editing. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 06:39, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Careful, there. The interview linked was added to Youtube by the publication that interviewed the band. The actual source here is Indiestar magazine; Youtube's just a conduit for their information. And considering it's the band themselves talking about their name, it's hard to argue unreliability. Chubbles (talk) 13:35, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was not making any judgments on the reliability of the information. This article has gone to AfD four 5 times, and to be honest, I was about the only advocate for keeping the article during 3 of those discussions. I was attempting to make sure that the article does not drift back to the state it was when I first came across it a year ago on the AfD boards. Myspace links fall outside the guidelines as listed here: WP:ELNO, item number 10. I was also cautioning against using Youtube itself as a source, either on talk pages or on article pages. I did not attempt to remove the Indiestar source. There was no disrespect to the band or the editor intended. Best regards. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 04:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
With their cracking the top 100 of the Billboard 200, I don't think there ever will be a serious AfD proceeding again, so no fears there. But this is a heavy vandalism target, so it's certainly likely that it will decline in quality before it becomes stable (once the band is out of the limelight; could be years). The Myspace shouldn't be used as an RS but it's an official site, which WP:EL permits (and we have a template for its use). Chubbles (talk) 03:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All of this is true, however, in advocating for the link, the band faces being summarily labeled with "Myspace band" for as long as the link remains. It's a mixed blessing at best. If I were someone who was thinking of seeing Brokencyde on the Warped tour, and couldn't find an official website, but did find a Wikipedia article that read like a fan page and points to a Myspace page, I'd be not too impressed. In advocating for the removal of the link, I wasn't trying to diminish the article, but elevate it. If the community wants the article to look amateurish and have maintenance tags for the next year, who am I to argue? --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 07:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Reception?[edit]

I changed the section to "Criticism" because right now that's all that is there. RKFS (talk) 00:52, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but in the interest of neutrality it probably should be kept under the former title. I added an introductory sentence so it reads (slightly) less like a litany. Chubbles (talk) 01:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Theres too much negativity on the page. It's far from neutral. You put nothing but bad reviews. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.176.63 (talk) 14:21, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's because no good reviews exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.95.247.110 (talk) 02:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DUDE, THERE ARE NO GOOD REVIEWS FOR THIS BAND. None of the critics in any kind of respected magazine/webzine would be idiotic enough to call this music.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.58.173.226 (talk) 14:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Attack...(even this title might be bad)[edit]

eh...has anybody noted that the pages of The Broken!, BC13, and the EPs were deleted? (<<obvious) they were deleted by haters as one can see on the discussion...the other users didn't pay attention because of that...and now they deleted them, even known that a big amount of fans like the songs of those albums, and the BC13 EP is a studio production, so...why those pages have to be deleted?...but the way i'm not saying without any source, look at the deletion page on The Broken!...Bc13rox (talk) 23:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and another thing is that those albums were popular, if you check the comments on iTunes of BC13 EP you will find that people was annoyed that the albums weren't up anymore Bc13rox (talk) 21:54, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Being quite random at the subject...maybe this is a lil help http://theshuttershadescrew.com/2009/01/30/shutter-shades-indie-artist-of-the-week-brokencyde/ and this http://perfectlines.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/i-cant-believe-i-missed-this/ Bc13rox (talk) 21:54, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uh... wow[edit]

Ok, I won't say anything more then I have to because I don't even like spending time around this tripe, but it seems to me a locked article shouldn't have the words "a terrible music group" right up at the top. Regardless of my opinions or anyone else's, wikipedia is not a place for opinions and slander. Plus, the critical response section just about covers it anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.213.169 (talk) 02:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fact. Not Opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.219.19 (talk) 00:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

100% true

Yes, we can prove it with science. 81.105.211.171 (talk) 20:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Punk as a Genre[edit]

Yeah, I don't care if the NY Times is cited as calling this punk. Pretty obviously not.--Wick3dd (talk) 07:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok, we respect your opinion, but you had to discuss it here first before making any change on the page as set before...also here there are other articles where you can find that they are described as punk =) (even though I don't like that they are being considered punk..I'm writing this principally for the fact that you didn't talked about this before editing =D) http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1615543/20090708/all_time_low.jhtml http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1617284/20090730/all_time_low.jhtml Bc13rox (talk) 01:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The First Sentence[edit]

"Brokencyde (marketed as brokeNCYDE) is a musical group..."

I take issue with the words "musical group".

Can we perhaps just leave out the word musical?

I take major issue with the fact that they are classifies as punk. I mean anyone can sure as hell tell theyre far from it. Just because the NY Times says theyre punk doesnt mean they are. I'm not a contrib or anything, but i think you should at least mention the fact that they have no definite genre, at least as far as punk goes, somewhere in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.62.241.54 (talk) 19:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

58.161.91.100 (talk) 03:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um, why? Because you personally don't like it, or because there are reliable sources indicating they aren't a musical group? tedder (talk) 05:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Um, musical group can work, because they are four, one produces, and plays the guitars on some songs, other also plays the synths..and three sing normally on most of the songs.. and the last one sings on the concerts too as some sources say.. and he helps on the mix of the music..so..musical group =D. Also we have forgotten to add that they also appear as BC13 (umm yea this is a bit random) Bc13rox (talk) 02:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Religous Views" Section[edit]

Are you serious? Someone needs to delete that. That has no sources at all. (173.66.183.23 (talk) 20:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Agreed...and done. --Onorem♠Dil 21:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mascot?[edit]

Why is the mascot listed as a band member? Is this relevant and can it be cited? 221.213.9.188 (talk) 10:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's listed as member because the pig used to appear as member on their myspace page, and on other pages it stills, the pig is part of the image of the band, and it dances on the concerts. 190.11.3.119 (talk) 00:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed, as unsourced and completely irrelevant to an article about a "notable" band on Wikipedia. Please do not install this information again without a source meeting the following guidelines: WP:RS.


No, Bree needs to be added. He's an integral part o the band and needs to be mentioned. You have members of the bands names spelled wrong, and you don't have Bree. This page isn't correct at all. ADD BREE. He's a member too, at least mention him! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.176.63 (talk) 14:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Aye aye aye.. My god THEY MADE A SONG NAMED BREE BREE!! Of course he should be added. Bree is a part of the Band! Brokencyder (talk) 12:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)♠♣♥♦[reply]

...advertisement? Seriously?[edit]

How is this written like an advertisement? The critical reception is written strongly negatively. While I understand the neutrality bit, I don't understand how this is an advertisement. Fruckert (talk) 05:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sceptre (talk · contribs) added that tag. Might be worth pinging him. Okay, I'll put a {{tb}} on his page. tedder (talk) 06:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

article revision[edit]

I've watched this article since the first AfD discussion over a year ago. I've tried to let the community work its magic, but it just wasn't happening. This article needed a serious neutrality revision, stat.

Many of the changes were simply syntax, grammar and punctuation. Others were made to remove the constant barrage of templates being presented to casual Wikipedia users, accusing the article of "bias" and "reads like a fan site". Some of the deletions I made were in regards to non-encyclopedic information about the band's pig mascot, as well as paring back the excessive list of negative reviews.

Also, as editors, we really have to avoid words and phrases like the band's "feelings" and that they "earned a spot" and "were invited back." These are things that agents and fans and parents say about bands, not objective writers.

Also, for the editors who seem to want to perversely include every random comment about this band, all of which are admittedly bad reviews... such as "if this is the future of music, we're f***ing outta here", or a not notable magazine "poking fun at the band," I have a question. Are either of these two comments even remotely encyclopedic? It seems to be somewhat "overkill" to have the band called fucking horrendous, the antithesis of music, and "everything that's wrong with" today's culture... and then go on to say they scored a "very high" on some random scale of "irritation factor." Wikipedia is not Rotten Tomatoes.

Band articles don't get passes on the basic style guidelines on Wikipedia. Lists of trivial information, like the name of every single band in every single tour, notable and not, should be avoided, especially when they form an endless paragraph of dead, red links. And, while Brokencyde's self published record label is probably interesting to the most die hard of fans, it will most likely never receive it's own Wikipedia article, so that dead wikilink has also been removed. Since their independent music, for the time being, is not notable enough to merit articles on Wikipedia, the dead wikilinks for them have been removed as well.

Also, a band "announcing a tour" always needs a source, so until one can be provided, I have deleted it as WP:CRYSTAL.

So before you attack me for being a fan, or being a hater, check out what it looked like before:[5]

--OliverTwisted (Talk)(Stuff) 09:43, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this has been said before: If you can find a notable critic with anything positive to say about Brokencyde, please include a quote. The band is universally critically panned. They are the Battlefield Earth of music. The idea of removing the reams of negative criticism found on the Battlefield Earth article is absurd, since that movie's lack of quality is why it's remembered, years after it bombed out of theaters. Like it or not, unanimous critical animosity is a reason why Brokencyde is staying on pop culture's radar. (I should add that your cleanup was badly needed and the article is a lot more coherent now.) SluggoOne (talk) 20:50, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll agree with some of that, and certainly thanks for the props, but realistically, Brokencyde didn't really pass the notability test on Wikipedia until their first full length release charted on the Billboard 200, earlier this year. There were 5 AfD discussions about the band up to that point, with advocates (including me, though I despise the band) trying to use their bad publicity as an argument for notability (although in my case, I was arguing that notability came from the band being signed to the Warped tour which, to me, confers notability by itself). There was absolutely no clear consensus that the bad publicity was enough to denote notability. So, that being the case, there isn't really a reason to keep heaping on bad reviews for an album that's been out less than a year, unless the sources are so notable, that existing, less notable reviews/sources should be removed to make room for them. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 23:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Brokencyde → brokeNCYDE — The capitilization of the article is incorrect. I feel this should be corrected. Krazycev13 (talk) 21:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose; see WP:MOSTRADE. We don't do funny spellings invented by marketing departments; they could change tomorrow. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per the above user, proposed name violates WP:MOSTM. TJ Spyke 22:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:MOSTM. 「 ɠu¹ɖяy 」¤ • ¢  22:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:MOSTM. Also, the discrepancy is explained in the first sentence of the article. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 22:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, at least people here are smart, unlike the people at Talk:NeXT and Talk:NeXTSTEP (who think that wonky capitalization should be used for no reason). TJ Spyke 21:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: No need to whip a dead horse, guys. I wasn't aware of the anti-marketing page. My apologies. Krazycev13 19:40, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment about Brokencyde's fame[edit]

Alex Gaskarth of All Time Low told mtv.com that "There used to be that whole mentality of ... it had to be 100 percent genuine, or no one would take it seriously. But that whole line has been blurred now ... You have all these kids coming up on Disney pop who then discover bands like BrokeNCYDE, and they're like, 'Oh my God, they said f---!,' and they fall in love instantly, because it's their version of '80s punk."[1]

  1. ^ Montgomery, James (8 July 2009). "All Time Low's Nothing Personal Takes Aim At Paramore, Fall Out Boy". mtv.com. Retrieved 2009-09-27.

I thought this comment was quite interesting, but OliverTwisted removed it as he thought there was too much criticism already. I think the usefulness of this quote to the article is to help explain their success despite being almost universally panned by critics. I'll let other editors decide if it should go back in. Fences&Windows 23:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. To be precise, I believe I said there was enough "critical reception" for a band that has only had 1 major release. I believe I went on to say that if you felt that this imparted any serious encyclopedic information, I had no problem with it being re-installed in the 2nd paragraph of the critical reviews section of the article. But let me ask, what information does this tell us about the band? Does it explain the musical style? Type of instruments played? Is Alex Gaskarth considered to be an expert on music theory? Is this assertion shared by other music critics? Does this really explain why the band was commercially successful, but panned by the critics? It seems to be one opinion by a member of a band, that, without explanation, doesn't communicate anything useful about Brokencyde, but rather seeks to paint Brokencyde fans in a particular light, namely musically uneducated and musically unsophisticated enough to separate punk rock music from other genres (which I don't necessarily disagree with, but I'm not an expert). If the community feels this adds useful information to the article, I have no desire to block it. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 01:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, cheers. I didn't mean to misrepresent what you said. I suppose I feel that beggars can't be choosers: if there were better quotes and reviews available to us we'd use those instead, but without them we need to work with what we've got. An opinion from a musician given to MTV that they felt worth printing isn't a random opinion, though analysis from music critics would be a whole lot better. Fences&Windows 02:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And I just removed it again, before I ran into this discussion here. My 2 cents: there is not enough context to make the argument that F&W is pointing at. Of course, y'all said this two years ago, and maybe more has been published since then. Might I add that I agree with the quote: I just listened to some tunes and it's some of the most infantile drivel I've ever heard. Drmies (talk) 01:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I blame Wikipedia's NPP for suckering me into watching the music video for their one "hit" single. The desire to bleach not only my eyes and ears, but my entire brain, was almost overwhelming. I consider it to be the absolute worst song and video I've ever watched, and I can tell you, that is quite an achievement for the band. After all, I've watched drunk Karaoke in Mexico. Still, I agree with my original point. I don't think the quote really adds any information to the article, and I do actually now advocate for its removal.--OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 01:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Blame it on Wikipedia, sure. I'm curious to see what Fences has to say, if anything. They're an admin and outrank you, Oliver, so hold your horses. I imagine, BTW, that drunk karaoke has some kind of entertainment value. I listened to it because I wanted to learn what crunkcore was, and now I know. It's kind of like the Beastie Boys in the 80s, but with not a single musical skill and no desire to pretend to be meaningful. That, and it sucks. Ha! I spoke my peace. BTW, my Facebook page is lit up after I posted on this band. Drmies (talk) 02:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for deletion[edit]

this article does not meet the Wikipedia standards for notability. Someone needs to do something about it, I nominate it be deleted. Note this is based on a editorial opinion and not on a personal bias. Either way, can someone find sources for this band being dance punk, it would settle the whole genre argumentDeedeek (talk) 19:23, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This band is sadly notable. They've received a lot of attention. If there aren't enough sources, then these might help. NME album review, LA Times music blog article, and again, music.co.uk review, Kerrang! podcast, interview by The Quietus, Sonic Dice review, Change The Record interview, interview by Revolver, Ottawa Citizen review, comment by Warren Ellis, interview by ChartAttack, and here's confirmation that their album charted at #86 in the Billboard 200 in July. There's briefer comments in the NYT, San Joaquin Record, mtv.com, Salon Fences&Windows 23:36, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Screamo?[edit]

While I know that this is sourced, I am in firm disagreement with the use of this term, and I challenge the reliability or accuracy of the sources. I also question whether or not there's a legitimate consensus on this at current. In my opinion, this band deviates very little from Crunkcore. (Albert Mond (talk) 07:07, 9 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Alright. Upon reading the sources, the first one says they fuse hip-hop, screamo, and punk or something like that. Almost immediately after that, though, it declares not an instrument among them. Both screamo and punk are rock based. While I'm sure there are forms of rock which can be done a cappella/electronically/etc... it is very clear that punk and screamo can not be done this way, and stating that this band is either makes about as much sense as calling Tupac doom metal. The second source is AllMusic, but I'm not simply going to use their reputation among Wiki editors as only half reliable when it comes to genres. The fact is, source #2 does not list screamo in the album's genres. It lists it as pop-rap, and pop, and mentions "screamo vocals," which in all honesty could be anything. I'm removing reference #2 as a source for this claim. However, there are two other references which could have been used as sources, but weren't, which I'd like to address. Firstly, the Boston Pheonix article which claims they've fused screamo and crunkcore into... um... "Scrunk." I'd like anyone reading to note that this isn't actually calling the group screamo, and I'm pretty sure screaming is allowed in crunkcore, anyway. Nextly, there's the Guardian article which essentially says the same thing. Only difference here is that it refers to the screamo element as "screamo metal," a genre which doesn't exist. Anyway, that's all for the moment. Cheers. (Albert Mond (talk) 07:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Some Details[edit]

hi there, i just checked that THA $C3N3 MiXTaPe has been added to the article, well it didnt come out in 2007, it came appeared online in 2008 with songs that have songs of the "emo" BC13 and the "dirt" one, i think the album was made of a collection of songs that the guys of the band gave free on myspace (as they tell there on a new bulletin, and they r going to post a new one free soon), as you may see on the album, if you have it, there's some of the last songs before they signed with the label and that's 2008, not 2007.

Another thing is that i think the Skeet Skeet video mention shouldn't appear, as nobody knows if it is really going to be a video for that song, I don't think there would be a video as they would have to re-record one of Freaxxx and join it with Skeet Skeet as the songs are joined in the album, and Skeet Skeet get's boring as mostly it just says Skeet skeet!...

)

Bc13rox (talk) 16:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Just found some extra details around the net: http://www.purevolume.com/BrokenCydee for a little extended Bio ;) and http://megustaelposthc.blogspot.com/search/label/Brokencyde for the albums.. Bc13rox (talk) 01:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Antz?[edit]

Alright, Antz has no part in their recording process. He's not in the music, and he wasnt in their album-recording videos. i think his instruments should be changed, because all he does is live backing vocals (when he actually is there, which is only occasionally). maybe "live backing vocals?"

If you have a source, please add any pertinent information. If you do not have a source, please do not add any claims that can't be backed up. Şłџğģő 08:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- well first off, his role on the wiki page doesn't have sources either.

Do whatever you want, but if it's not sourced, it won't last. Şłџğģő 16:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Xrayx1, 3 June 2010[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} The truth about the members of "Not Listening to Brokencyde" needs to be told.

Xrayx1 (talk) 01:28, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Hi there, I've declined this request as no request has been made to edit the article. Please make sure that in any future requests that you make you use the format "Please change x to y", otherwise it can be difficult for us to find out exactly what edit you would like to be made to the page. Thanks, Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 01:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arrest in New Mexico[edit]

According to SputnikMusic, the boys have been arrested on charges of drug possession, rape, and child porn. Original Article. Not yet verified, I guess, aside from the linked article. McFlynnTHM (talk) 12:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Subnoize1914, 18 October 2010[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}}

Official Website http://www.brokencyde.com

Subnoize1914 (talk) 23:01, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks, Stickee (talk) 09:12, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link dead. Ronabop (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Subnoize1914, 18 October 2010[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}}

Label: BreakSilence Recordings (not Break Silence) http://www.breaksilencerecordings.com

They NEVER signed to "Suburban Noize Records" they signed to Suburban Noize Label Group's subsidiary company BreakSilence Recordings (Suburban Noize Records is also a subsidiary of Suburban Noize Label Group (SNLG) http://www.snlgmusic.com

Subnoize1914 (talk) 23:15, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Did the first part. As per the second part, can you provide a reliable source to confirm this? Thanks, Stickee (talk) 09:16, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Broken! Album[edit]

First off The Broken! was an album, it was independently released but not a mixtape. So that should be changed. And I have no idea why it was removed from the "history" section but it should be put back in along with the scene mixtape, if its because of lack of information, I can provide many useful sources :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.4.121 (talk) 03:56, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it could be considered a demo or an album. WP guidelines do state however that while albums are notable for generally any artist who has article, demos are vastly not notable unless the group has a high importance, of which Brokencyde does not meet. • GunMetal Angel 07:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 1 October 2012[edit]

Please change: Julian McLennan to Julian MccLennan, because it is spelled wrong. 109.79.150.87 (talk) 19:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2014[edit]

2602:304:CF38:BAA0:CD2E:4559:CC7B:D370 (talk) 05:06, 16 August 2014 (UTC) Hello this page needs to be updated a little with true information on what brokencyde has done in 2013 and 2014 they have new stuff ^^[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 09:46, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Antz[edit]

Anthony "Antz" Trujillo left the group a few weeks back. Can someone update the members list? Lux ex Tenebris (talk) 15:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Touring members[edit]

I don't know where Paulo Hidalgo and Ace Neroexistence are mentioned as the touring members of Brokencyde, but I found another one : their drummer, Chad "Big Chaco" Chadillac who is introduced in this video[1] on the band's official YouTube channel at about 2:10. I don't know if it was a joke but I don't think so since they actually had a drummer on stage for many live shows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.220.238.71 (talk) 10:03, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8YYhxa9R4A

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Brokencyde. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:48, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brokencyde. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:16, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brokencyde. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phat j’s return (September 2021)[edit]

Phat j has been back in the group since Around September 2021 (or at least that’s the first time he did a show with them since originally leaving in 2012) has has been apart of every Brokencyde performance ever since. Can someone put him back in the members section? 96.67.87.97 (talk) 20:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Phat J is officially back in Brokencyde and they are no longer signed with cleopatra[edit]

I posted about this a few mo the ago, but nobody’s edited it since. I know not a lot of people care about this group anymore, Brokencyde themselves are such boomers when it comes to their internet presence (I say that with respect), so they probably won’t edit their own Wikipedia article, but I care about them so I’m gonna bring this up. Phat J is back in the group, has been since September 2021, when the group opened for Whitney Petyton, and they left X-Ray/cleopatra records sometime between the 0 to Brokencyde album and August 25, 2022 with the release of their new song “2009”. They are now signed with PushDrive Records, a label found by Phat J himself. Can someone please edit this article to reflect this, I don’t really know how to provide sources in this section, but all the info you need is on Their Instagram and Spotify 2600:1702:B80:10D0:978:33BA:B22E:5A0B (talk) 23:42, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2023[edit]

New EP From the mud October 31st 2022 Sev on hiatus since 2022, phat J returned to the group in 2022 2607:FEA8:5CA0:5EDD:D404:F83A:B431:2B9E (talk) 21:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:27, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brokencyde&oldid=1200378936"