Talk:Punk rock

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articlePunk rock is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 21, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 19, 2004Refreshing brilliant proseKept
December 4, 2004Peer reviewReviewed
January 18, 2007Featured article reviewKept
October 16, 2021Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

"Punk" or "Punk Rock"?[edit]

I have never seen the term "Punk Rock" used in the punk subculture in the 1980ies and 1990ies, neither in a conversation, nor in fanzines or books. Case in point is this article in the Encyclopedia Britannica by John Savage, who should know a thing or two about punk.

The first time I became aware of the term "punk rock" was as a derogatory reference to mainstream bands like Green Day and Blink-123 that were not considered in any way related to a punk lifestyle. At least that is the situation in Europe (including the UK). As the article states, the term "punk rock" was a label attached by "rock critics" (i.e. outsiders), so I think that the term used by the people within that specific subculture should take preference.

I am curious what the process is for suggesting renaming an article, which wikipedia guidelines are relevant here, so that I figure out how to contribute to that.

2.203.158.238 (talk) 07:52, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Its a US/UK thing. Far as I know, Americans distinguish because the term "punk" was already in use and well known by the '50s, basically as a somebody that was low down, untrustworthy and delinquent. Ceoil (talk) 23:51, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Its specifically an American thing. And adding rock to the end I'm quite sure probably originated in California and or the South U.S South West. They like to add on Rock to everything. It was never called Punk Rock anywhere else. Even in Canada, which shared the early scene. It was called Punk.Starbwoy (talk) 18:02, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Cambridge dictionaries say that "punk" means the people who listen to the genre, whereas "punk rock" is the genre in dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/punk-rock dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/punk and in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, "punk" in terms of music is simply cited as a synonym for punk rock and doesn't have its own definition in www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punk%20rock, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punk. Issan Sumisu (talk) 19:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
To some extent it's a disambiguation thing - the word "punk" has many meanings. As a Brit, I have absolutely no problem with the use of "punk rock" as the title of this article, and would oppose any change. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:26, 6 August 2019 (UTC).[reply]
As I recall from 1976-1977 the term 'punk rock' was in fairly widespread use in the UK alongside 'punk'. (Insistence on 'punk' is a later phenomenon common among people who want to be purist or hardcore.) I would note, however, that the use of the term 'punk' over a number of years before 1976 (and in the US since) obscures the radical difference between what Patti Smith & co. were up to (infected with a dismaying wish to be 'Bohemian') and what the Sex Pistols et al. were doing. (The Ramones, to give them their credit, weren't would-be Bohemians; they were lovable Muppets.) Despite the fact that the word was in use before 1976 to describe musical genres, 'Punk' started with the Sex Pistols, and all the rest is literature (or 'new wave'). Acorrector (talk) 15:23, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree with those here who affirm that the article should have "...rock" in the title, if for no other reason than that the article is, after all, dealing with the musical genre, not the subculture (there's another article for that). But, I think there's more to it. We shouldn't undercount the the role of musical artists who came before the Sex Pistols. I guess it all comes down to whether one considers "punk" to be primarily a musical or subcultural phenomenon. Trying to better appreciate the pre-Sex Pistols musical thread might come as an unexpected blessing in a time when "punk" culture seems hopelessly passé. With all due respect, Acorrector, I think that the Ramones (like Patti Smith) probably understood the whole musical world that punk evolved out of better than a lot of the people who dyed their hair and latched onto the scene in the wake of the Sex Pistols notoriety circa '76/'77. But, you are right—they did say "punk rock" then. Garagepunk66 (talk) 20:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Patti Smith and the Ramones may have 'understood' better the musical world punk evolved out of, but I still feel the conventionally musicological part of it all was/is secondary. Attitude, including the attitude to playing music, was the most important part. Musicologically the most important part was the desire to shred whatever passed for the musicological. Acorrector (talk) 20:38, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I actually agree. But, my point was just that the music preceded the whole subculture thing that eventually grew around it. So, I think keeping it "punk rock" just makes more sense. Garagepunk66 (talk) 11:48, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
it’s *1990s and *1980s Rosiedanugbtugn (talk) 05:40, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues[edit]

-- Guerillero Parlez Moi 21:27, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't agree more. The page has fallen to shit since we lost DCGeist. I think there are quite a lot of good editors watching that could maybe rescue, especially from tacked on mention of local scene bands, and issues of unde weight. Ceoil (talk) 21:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Readable prose size is 82 kB so "Probably should be divided (although the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading material)".
As a WP:FFD regular, I also agree that the number of non-free files (mostly sound but also a few images) is uncomfortably high. These need to be looked at both individually and as a total. Ping me if you want help with those.
Citation variation (ie. plain short footnotes vs. templated short footnotes) is also something I can help with upon request.
Cheers – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:11, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One of the major reasons the article is so bloaded, and thus picking from poor and unreliable sources, is that there is too much emphasis on detailing non notable bands from local scenes. Its better this article remains an overview of the movement overall, and not become a list of every garage punk band ever. As a reader, I find excessively blue linked para after para on each and every city totally...ugg. Am focusing recent trimming on these, help appreciated; Finnusertop if you know others who would be interest. Ceoil (talk) 23:45, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can help. I just didn't know if anyone else was paying attention here. My emo heart hurts when you axed the section, but it makes sense. Emo is a hardcore derivative -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 03:09, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

David Bowie's Diamond Dogs[edit]

Hey all. While expanding David Bowie's Diamond Dogs article, I have found quite a few sources, notably punknews.org, that consider this album as having a major impact on punk rock, including bands like the Sex Pistols. Yet, I'm surprised that this album is not mentioned once in this entire article, considering a few of Bowie's biographers, and other online sources, have argued its influence on punk. I'm obviously not saying Diamond Dogs directly created punk, but I am wondering if anyone who worked on this page would have any input on this subject, and whether or not there should be a sentence or two about Diamond Dogs in this article? Thanks! – zmbro (talk) 18:28, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that David Bowie gets brief mention in the article as an influence (by virtue of being part of glam rock). While Diamond Dogs could certainly be considered an important influence, some of Bowie's preceding work is equally so, particularly Ziggy Stardust. I agree with you that more could be said in the article about Bowie's influence. If we were to mention just one album, it would have to be Ziggy Stardust (I think there are sources citing its influence on punk). But maybe we could also mention Diamond Dogs and Aladdin Sane? Garagepunk66 (talk) 06:54, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No sources in the first section[edit]

I am wondering how an article can be a a featured article even though it has no inline sources cited in the first few paragraphs. --Pgapunk (talk) 01:55, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Leads do or don't have inline sources and may vary; see MOS:LEADCITE. --George Ho (talk) 01:59, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List[edit]

https://web.archive.org/web/20040410111708/https://thslone.tripod.com/Punk-bibliography.html

0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 04:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pure Hell?[edit]

I was wondering if the band Pure Hell might merit a mention in the article. They were a pioneering black punk band who were right there in mid-70s vanguard. The only problem may be that there hasn't been a ton written about them. There are a few articles out there. Should we? Garagepunk66 (talk) 06:07, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I created an account just to comment on this. I feel the band, Death should also be mentioned here. They’re another all black punk band. The 3 brothers were playing in 1974 and recorded an album in 1975. Cadidevil (talk) 18:31, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Death are mentioned in the "Proto-punk" subsection which is a part of "Precursors" section of the article. Issan Sumisu (talk) 19:04, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the thing is many people consider them to have invented true Punk. In my opinion, using the term, "proto-Punk" just discredits theor true contribution to the music. On a seperate note, there is other influence besides radio play and music distribution, and there os a high merit to the influence of live performance. It would be a massive discredit to simply just pile Death in the proto-Punk catagory.
DEATH 100% invented the true "synced drum and guitar fast power chords heavy distortion anti establishment lyrics punk energy loud yelling vocals the 3-chord progression" Punk music. They basically played true Punk 2 years before the Ramones and recorded a true Punk album 1 year before the Ramones recorded theirs. Either listen to Freakin Out, Keep on Knockin, and Where Do We Go From Here??? And you'll hear exactly what I'm saying. NorthCentralKing (talk) 12:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying that you think this article should discuss Death as if they invented the genre? I don't know how that could be done chronologically, seeing as most pieces on the New York Dolls discuss them as pioneering punk too (see: [1] [2] [3] [4]) and they formed in 1971 and released their debut in 1973, same goes for the Stooges ([5] [6] [7]) who formed in 1967 and released their debut in 1969. Death only released a single while they were together, in 1976, which is the same year as the Ramones, Sex Pistols, Damned, Richard Hell, Runaways, Saints and Jayne County did the same. Two of the three songs you listed weren't even released until 2009. Punk already objectively existed by the time Death began releasing music. Furthermore, what early punk bands cite Death as an influence? The NYD influenced Television, Talking Heads, the Ramones, Richard Hell, the Sex Pistols, Clash and Damned. The Stooges influenced the NYD, Sex Pistols, Ramones, Joan Jett and the Damned. Those are both according to each respective band's article (and the NYD's biography), can you find any source where a band from that era cites Death as an influence? Issan Sumisu (talk) 13:32, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm not saying vocally credit them for inventing the entire genre of Punk, because that is something that is much harder to define, I am simply stating that they should be included in the story of Punk as a Punk band. NorthCentralKing (talk) 00:54, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But they already are included in the article? Issan Sumisu (talk) 09:02, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linking names and band names[edit]

I've linked all relevant names and bands in the Suggested viewing section even if linked above. I think exceptions to the rule about redundancy are allowed - I did it because some readers might not think of clicking links until they get to this section, thus not needing to search above again, or they might jump to this section to begin with. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 07:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More than just documentaries[edit]

Does anyone want to discuss adding Sid and Nancy, Jubilee, and The Great Rock'n'Roll Swindle to the Suggested viewing section? It's not called Suggested documentaries, right? They'd certainly be appropriate if the article includes punk culture, as opposed to just punk music. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 11:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC) s[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:40, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment[edit]

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
RFC is talking about a different article, discussion is taking place at Talk:The_Offspring#Request_for_Comment. Belbury (talk) 09:42, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Should the lead say "The Offspring is an American rock band" or "The Offspring is an American punk rock band"? Sincerely, Key of G Minor. Tools: (talk, contribs) 16:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Summoned by bot) I might be missing something, but the current lead has neither variant. What's wrong with the status quo? ~ HAL333 17:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not on this article, on The Offspring, per WP:RFC#Publicizing an RfC Sincerely, Key of G Minor. Tools: (talk, contribs) 17:47, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn’t belong here. It belongs solely on the talk page for the article it’s referring to. NJZombie (talk) 21:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RFC#Publicizing an RFC Sincerely, Key of G Minor. Tools: (talk, contribs) 23:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Publicizing the RfC does not mean opening the same RfC on an another article’s talk page. It means providing a link to the talk page of the relevant article. NJZombie (talk) 23:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Punk rock I normally say that there is no right/wrong answer when the genre is in question, but Punk Rock seems overwhelming. This RFC appears to be in two places. North8000 (talk) 20:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm fine either way, I just maintain the idea that the listed genre, unless there is literally no other applicable/major genre (ie Sex Pistols), should be as general as possible. Sincerely, Key of G Minor. Tools: (talk, contribs) 20:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bands / Artists that should be considered for use as representation of the genre[edit]

Punk is a very wide genre but I think most punk rockers would say a few bands could be used.

I'm biased as every person is so I will exclude artists like the Sex Pistols, Casualties, etc.

Here is a short list of bands that I believe could be used:

Bad Religion, Millions of Dead Cops, The Dead Milkmen, Black Flag, Germs, Dead Kennedy's, Ramones, Iggy Pop / The Stooges / The Losers, Blink-182, Bad Cop Bad Cop, Circle Jerks, and NOFX.

I feel that Bad Religion, Ramones, or Iggy Pop could be used over the others but each of these bands / artists are important in their own right. ThyOfThee (talk) 16:01, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ThyOfThee Any discussion of the classification of Punk is so ironic..... 146.199.238.79 (talk) 07:19, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First Punk Single[edit]

The article currently states "In October 1976, the Damned released the first UK punk rock band single, 'New Rose'" and cites a Guardian article that incorrectly attributes the origin of the term "punk rock" to Caroline Coon. The term predates her writing about the Damned (or other UK bands) in 1976 by 6 years, as attested to elsewhere in this entry. How one could define a single as being the very first UK punk single is unclear, especially since the Damned's release was not marketed as such initially---its dubious honor being awarded much later. That aside, if one were to measure purely on the style of the record, the description is still dubious: "New Rose" was produced by Nick Lowe for Stiff Records, who release Nick Lowe's self produced single "So It Goes" two months earlier. The B side of that record, "Heart of the City" is a blue print in production and chord structure for the "New Rose". Seems like this dubious title ought to go to that record. But better yet, this unfactual title, given to the record years after its release, should just be removed. 2001:A61:3017:E001:2C4D:ECB6:CB6B:64C3 (talk) 03:54, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@2001:A61:3017:E001:2C4D:ECB6:CB6B:64C3 you state "How one could define a single as being the very first UK punk single is unclear"
and then follow this by claiming the title for another single!!!! 146.199.238.79 (talk) 21:33, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing ref[edit]

@Recobben2: please fill in a citation for the empty ref you named "s&s 550". -- Fyrael (talk) 22:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Zombies[edit]

[8]. 197.87.135.242 (talk) 14:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to attribute popularity of new wave to Maggie Thatcher?!?[edit]

Someone put in a quote which suggested that the spread of "new wave" in the US coincided with the election of Thatcher as PM, and deleted the reference to MTV. While the quote may be factual, i.e. "new wave" did happen at about the same time that Thatcher's party won, I must express some skepticism as to the value in inclusion of said statement in an WP article that would suggest causality. In fact, I strongly suspect, but don't have any time to research the authoritative source, that MTV did have a significant role in exposing youths of America to music their local top 40 station was not playing. I would also suggest that the Conservatives being in the majority in the UK Parliament may not have had quite the same impact on musical tastes. Unless there is significant reason to keep this statement, I will revert the page back to suggesting MTV's role...DrKC MD (talk) 21:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One's first task upon doubting a source is to read the source and see what it says. Some Google snippets of the book appear to confirm the authors' assessment that Thatcherism was a rightward jump in the UK, accompanied by greater political polarisation and massive unemployment. The rich got richer and the poor got poorer. The authors posit that this stress caused a creative explosion in music. Binksternet (talk) 21:48, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Punk_rock&oldid=1217108363"